§rom  ffie  fetfirarg  of 

(profeeeor  J)enrg  <B>teen 

Q&equeafJfcb  fig  fitm  to 
ffie  fetfirarg  of 

(prtncefon  £0eofogtcdf  ^emtitdrg 


CE  25  . H23  1891 
MacDonald,  Malcolm. 

Harmony  of  ancient  history 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/harmonyofancient00macd_0 


/7  cf£  7^->  .>  ^y  y^ti 


HARMONY 


ANCIENT  HISTORY, 

AND 


CHRONOLOGY 

OF  THE 

EGYPTIANS  AND  JEWS. 

BY 

MALCOLM  MACDONALD,  A.M. 


PHILADELPHIA: 


J.  B.  LIPPINCOTT  COMPANY. 
1891. 


Copyright,  1891,  by  J.  B.  Lippincott  Company. 


CONTENTS. 


Introduction 


PAGE 

11 


PART  I. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Egyptians — The  Vague  Year — The  Five 
Intercalary  Days  and  the  Year  of  Three  Hundred  and  Sixty  Days — 
Philosophy  of  Intercalary  Periods — The  Copies  of  Manetho  as  affected 
by  the  Use  of  Years  of  Three  Hundred  and  Sixty  and  Three  Hun- 
dred and  Sixty-five  Days  in  establishing  the  Epoch  of  the  Capture 
of  Troy — The  Identity  between  the  Years  of  Three  Hundred  and 
Sixty  and  Three  Hundred  and  Sixty-five  Days — Egyptian  Months 
and  Seasons 21 


CHAPTER  II. 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Egyptians— -Adjustment  of  the  Egyptian 
Year  to  the  Julian — Adjustment  caused  by  the  Observation  of  Ti- 
mocharis— Effect  of  the  Decree  of  Canopus  upon  the  Vague  Year — The 
Rosetta  Stone  and  the  Restoration  of  the  Vague  Dates — The  Egyptian 
Lunar  Cycle  in  Connection  with  the  Enforcement  of  the  Decree  of 
Canopus — The  Luni-Solar  Cycle  of  Thirty-three  Years — The  Apis 
Cycle:  its  Nature,  its  Suspension,  and  its  Renewal— Two  Tables  of 
Apis  Cycles — The  Adjustment  usually  followed  between  the  Julian 
and  the  Vague  Year — The  History  of  the  Roman  and  Egyptian  Years 
in  the  Time  of  Emperor  Augustus— Objections  to  the  View  of  Dean 
Prideaux — The  Wrong  and  True  View  of  the  Reformation  of  the 
Roman  Year  by  Julius  Cassar — The  Effect  of  placing  the  1st  of  Jan- 
uary Seven  Days  earlier  upon  the  Concurrence  required  by  the  Obser- 
vation of  Timocharis — Comparative  Table  of  the  Wrong  and  True 

View — Era  of  the  Battle  of  Actium — Epoch  of  Augustus 26 

3 


4 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  III. 

PAGE 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Egyptians — Sothic  and  Phoenix  Cycles 
— The  Usual  View  of  the  Sothic — Its  Defects — True  View  of  the 
Sothic  Year — Three  Great  Seasons  of  the  Sothic  Year — Their  Lunar 
and  Luni-Sidereal  Character — Dates  of  the  Three  Great  Seasons — 
Statements  concerning  the  Rise  of  Sirius  attributed  to  Dositheus — 
Meton — Euctemon — The  Phoenix  Cycle — Its  Description  and  Length 
of  its  Seasons 48 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Egyptians — The  Henti — Hypothesis  that 
it  denoted  a Period  of  a Century — Division  of  a Century  into  Periods 
of  Twenty-five  and  Thirty-three  and  One-third  Years — The  Use 
of  the  Denominations  of  Minor  Time-Measures  to  denote  the  Sub- 
divisions of  Cycles — The  Contemplation  of  the  Egyptian  Year  in  Ref- 
erence to  the  Sothic  Period 56 

CHAPTER  V. 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Egyptians — The  Set  or  Cycle  of  Thirty 
Years — Its  Description  from  the  Monuments — The  Hypothesis  of  Mr. 
Gensler — Notices  of  Cycles  upon  the  Monuments — The  Cycle  of 
Twenty-nine  Years  and  not  of  Thirty — The  Cycle  to  denote  the 
Advance  of  the  Tropical  Points  in  the  Vague  Year — Pour  such 
Cycles  reckoned,  one  from  each  of  the  Four  Cardinal  Points  of  the 
Sun’s  Course — These  applied  to  the  Four  Jubilees  in  the  Reign  of 
Rameses  II 61 


CHAPTER  VI. 

Egyptian  Chronological  Epochs — Epoch  of  Thutmes  III. — Inscription 
of  the  Foundation-Stone  of  a Temple  at  Thebes — The  Chronological 
Value  of  the  Memorial — Hypothetical  Epoch  of  the  Memorial — Me- 
morial of  King  Nub — Hypothetical  Epoch  of  the  same — Epochs  of 
Jubilee  Cycles  in  Rameses  II. 's  Reign — Table  of  Epochs  of  Jubilee 
Cycles — Inscription  of  Amenemhib  upon  the  Death  of  Thutmes  III. 
— The  Regnal  Years  of  Thutmes  II. — Queen  Hatasou — Thutmes  III. 
— Table  of  the  same,  with  Years  of  Jubilee  Cycles — Determination  of 
the  Year  24  of  the  Memorial  of  the  laying  of  the  Foundation-Stone 
— Inscriptions  of  the  Regnal  Years  of  Thutmes  III. — Obelisk  of 
Queen  Hatasou — The  Use  of  the  Inscription  to  limit  the  Beginning 
of  the  Regnal  Years  of  the  Queen — Two  Views  of  the  same  con- 
trasted— Astronomical  Purpose  of  the  Obelisk — The  Haste  in  its 


CONTENTS. 


5 


PAGE 

Erection  accounted  for  by  the  Heliacal  Rising  of  Sirius  on  the  1st  of 
Thoth  of  the  Sixteenth  Year  of  Hatasou,  b.c.  1318 — The  Manetho- 
nian  Numbers  considered  and  rectified  to  agree  with  the  Monuments 
— The  Victorious  Campaign  of  Thutmes  III.  in  Years  22  and  23 — 

The  Battle  of  Megiddo — Harvest  reaped  after  the  Battle — This  Fact 
used  to  determine  the  Season  of  the  Year  at  the  Time  of  the  Battle — 

The  Customary  Times  for  entering  upon  Campaigns — The  Epoch  of 
the  Battle — Possible  Explanation  of  Years  21  and  22 — Determination 
of  the  Epoch  of  Thutmes  III.’s  Accession — Dates  established  for  the 
Reign  of  Thutmes  III 64 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Egyptian  Chronological  Epochs— Estimated  Epochs  of  Kings  preceding 
Thutmes  III.  in  the  Eighteenth  Dynasty 81 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

Egyptian  Chronological  Epochs — Estimate  of  the  Period  between 
Reigns  of  Thutmes  III.  and  Raineses  II. — The  Table  of  Abydos  as 
interpreted  by  Dr.  Brugsch — The  Scheme  of  the  Table  explained  by 
giving  each  King  a Reign  of  Forty  Years 82 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Egyptian  Chronological  Epochs — Rameses  II. — Era  of  King  Nub — 
Table  of  Regnal  Years  of  Rameses  II. — Epoch  of  the  Era  of  King 
Nub — Explanation  of  the  Calculation  of  the  Rise  of  Sirius  by  the 
One  Hundredth  Year— Table  of  One  Hundredth  Year — The  Origin 
of  the  Statement  of  Censorinus  of  the  Rise  of  Sirius — Heliacal 
Rising  of  Sirius  in  the  Reign  of  Rameses  II 84 


CHAPTER  X. 

Egyptian  Chronological  Epochs — Period  between  Rameses  II.  and 
Takelath  II. — Epoch  of  Takelath — Two  Inscriptions  mentioning  As- 
tronomical Phenomena — The  Use  made  of  these  to  determine  the 
Epoch  of  Takelath — The  Rise  of  Sirius — Wrong  Views  combated — 
The  Eclipse  of  the  Moon  in  the  Fifteenth  Year  of  Takelath — Super- 
stition about  Eclipses — Good  Omens  and  Evil  Omens — Assyrian  As- 
tronomical Tablets  relating  to  Eclipses — Luni-Solar  Cycles — Cycles 
of  Twenty-one,  Eighty-four,  Three  Hundred  and  Thirty-six,  and 
Thirteen  Hundred  and  Forty-four  Years  explained — Tables  for  the 
same — Cycle  of  Vague  Year  and  Concurrent  Lunar  Year — Interca- 

1* 


6 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

lary  Months,  Second  Adar  and  Second  Nisan,  and  their  Effect  upon 
the  Yague  and  Lunar  Years — Tropical  Cycle  of  Sixty  Years — The 
Eclipse  of  Esdusarabe — Causes  arising  out  of  the  Superstition  about 
Eclipses  operating  to  its  Perpetuation — Eclipse  of  Thales — Eclipse  of 
Larissa — Eclipse  of  Sardis — Epoch  of  the  Rise  of  Sirius  in  the  Reign 
of  Takelath — Epoch  of  the  Phenomenon  of  the  Fifteenth  Year — Apis 
Cycle  reckoned  from  Full  Moon  on  1st  of  Thoth — Indication  of  the 
Fifteenth  Year — Indication  of  the  Twelfth  Year — Table  illustrating 
Cycles  of  Twenty-five  Years  and  the  Two  Indications — Cycles  of  the 
Indication  of  the  Twelfth  Year  (Eleven  Years)  between  the  Rise  of 
Sirius  in  b.c.  1318,  b.c.  999,  and  b.c.  845 — Cycles  of  Eleven  Years  a 
Subdivision  of  the  Reckoning  by  the  One  Hundredth  Year — Epoch 
of  Shishak,  the  First  King  of  the  Twenty-second  Dynasty — Epochs 
of  Tirhakah — Psamethik  I. — Necho — Psamethik  II. — Hophra — 
Amasis — Psamethik  III. — Epoch  of  Persian  Invasion 90 


PART  II. 


CHAPTER  SI. 

Technical  Chronology  of  the  Jews— Jewish  Year  after  the  Babylonian 
Captivity — Luni-Solar  Year  regulated  by  Constant  Observation  of 
Sun  and  Moon — The  Object  of  a Prescribed  Calendar — Cycles  of 
Meton  — Callippus  — Hipparchus  — Jewish  Cycle  of  Eighty-four 
Years — Reformation  of  Jewish  Year  by  Rabbi  Hillel — The  Year  of 
Three  Hundred  and  Sixty  Days — Historical  Festivals — Jewish  Days 
— Months — Years— Conditions  permitting  Several  Kinds  of  Years — 
Abib — Ethanim — Intercalations — Jewish  Sabbaths  and  Special  Days 
— Philosophical  Basis  of  the  Days  of  Rest— Chronological  Order  of 
Days  of  Rest  and  Labor — Adam’s  Stay  in  the  Garden  of  Eden  a 
Type  of  the  Jewish  Sabbatical  Year — Chronological  Order  of  the 
Great  Days  of  the  Week  of  Years — Natural  Basis  of  the  Jewish 
System — The  Rest  Periods  of  Primitive  Man  the  Origin  of  the  Year 
of  Ten  Months — New  Conditions  produced  by  an  Improved  Social 
State — Application  of  the  Natural  Period  of  Rest  in  the  Jewish  Sys- 
tem— Jewish  Festivals  and  Cycles — Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread — 
Feast  of  Tabernacles — The  Two  compared — Their  Cyclic  Character 
— Feast  of  Pentecost — Sabbatical  and  Jubilee  Years — Chronological 
Order  of  Sabbatical  Years — Term  of  the  Jubilee  Cycle — Sabbatical 
Week  in  Two  Forms — Table  of  Jubilee  Cycle — Eponymous  Cycles — 
Their  Chronological  Value Ill 


CONTENTS. 


7 


CHAPTEE  XII. 

PAGE 

Historical  Chronology  of  the  Jews — Chronological  Data  from  the  Exo- 
dus to  Kehoboam — The  Four  Hundred  and  Eighty  Years  of  I.  Kings 
vi.  1 — 'Chronological  Table  from  the  Exodus  to  Kehoboam — Table  ex- 
plained— Astronomical  Knowledge  of  the  Jews — Season  of  the  Year 
at  the  Time  of  the  Exodus — Vague  Year,  the  Historical  Year  of  the 
Jews  — Considerations  determining  the  Epoch  of  the  Exodus — 
Foundation  of  Solomon’s  Temple — Dates  of  the  Eeligious  Festivals 
used  to  determine  Eras — Epoch  of  the  Exodus — Epoch  of  the  Taber- 
nacle— Epoch  of  the  Crossing  of  the  Jordan — Epoch  of  Othniel — 
Ethanim  compared  with  the  Egyptian  Month  Athyr — Table  of  Con- 
current Jewish  and  Egyptian  Months — The  Series  of  Eponymous 
Cycles — Eponym  of  Othniel — Eponym  of  Eli — Epoch  of  the  Founda- 
tion of  Solomon’s  Temple 133 

CHAPTEE  XIII. 

Historical  Chronology  of  the  Jews — Synchronous  Histories  of  Judah 
and  Israel — Difficulties  stated — Chronological  Data  from  Kehoboam 
to  the  Destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar — Chronological 
Table  explained — Institution  of  the  Worship  of  the  Golden  Calves 
by  Jeroboam  I. — Epoch  of  the  Festival  of  the  15th  of  the  Eighth 
Month — Epoch  of  Jeroboam  I. — Epoch  of  Kehoboam — Cycle  of 
Eclipse  of  Jeroboam  I.— Epoch  of  Omri — Epoch  of  Jehu — Jehoahaz 
and  Jehoash  of  Israel — Jeroboam  II. — Azariah — Menahem — Peka- 
hiah — Pekah — Jotliam — Hoshea— Aliaz — The  Names  of  Jotham  and 
Ahaz — Eclipse  of  Hezekiah — Summary  of  Eclipses  by  which  the 
Cycles  were  regulated 156 


PART  III. 


CHAPTEE  XIV. 

Keduction  of  the  Era  of  Nabonassar — The  Proposed  Keductions — The 
Astronomical  Basis  of  the  Canon — The  Proposed  Changes — Esar- 
liaddon — Nabopolassar  and  Nebuchadnezzar — Cyrus — Cambyses — 
Egyptian  Inscriptions  relating  to  the  Keigns  of  Xerxes  and  Artax- 
erxes — Xerxes — Artaxerxes — Eclipses  connected  with  the  Proposed 
Changes — Chronological  Table  from  the  Fourth  Year  of  Cyrus  to  the 
Twelfth  Year  of  Darius  Nothus — Cycles  of  the  Series  of  b.c.  557,  585, 


8 


CONTENTS. 


and  527 — The  Eclipse  of  the  Seventh  Y ear  of  Cambyses — Disagreement 
between  the  Almagest  and  the  Canon — No  Eclipse  b.c.  523  on  the  17th- 
16th  of  Phamenoth — Eclipse  of  the  Last  Year  of  Cambyses — Slaying 
of  the  Apis  Bull  by  Cambyses — Assyrian  Canon  compared  with  that 
of  Ptolemy — Adjustment  between  the  Two  adopted  by  George 
Smith — The  Effect  upon  the  Assyrian  Canon  of  the  lowering  of  the 
Epochs  of  Ptolemy’s  Canon — The  Eclipse  of  Esdusarabe — The  Reg- 
nal Years  of  Ptolemy’s  Canon,  how  reckoned — Mr.  Smith’s  View  of 
Ptolemy — Mr.  Smith  on  the  Assyrian  Practice — Opposing  View  of 
Professor  Oppert — The  Method  followed  by  Ptolemy  illustrated  by 
the  Babylonian  Chronicle — The  Babylonian  Chronicle — Epochs  of 
Assyrian  Kings  from  Shalmaneser  II.  to  Kineladinos,  inclusive  . . 183 

CHAPTER  XV. 

Contacts  between  Egyptian  and  Jewish  History — The  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus — The  Jews  in  the  Time  of  Tlnitmes  III. — Invasion  of  Judah 
by  Shishak — Tirhakah  and  Hezekiah — Josiah  and  Necho — Hophra 
and  Zedekiah 197 


CHAPTER  XYI. 

Contacts  between  Jewish  and  Assyrian  History- — Shalmaneser  II.  with 
Ahab,  Jehu  or  Jehoram— Tiglath  Pileser  with  Azariah,  Menahem, 
Pekah,  Jehoahaz,  and  Hoshea — Shalmaneser  with  Hoshea — Sargon 
and  the  Capture  of  Samaria — Sennacherib  is  King  Jareb — Senna- 
cherib with  Hezekiah  201 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

Jewish  History  in  Connection  with  the  Histories  of  Babylon  and  Persia 
— Battle  of  Megiddo  between  Necho  and  Josiah — Nebuchadnezzar 
and  Necho — Nabopolassar,  King  of  Assyria,  and  Nebuchadnezzar, 
King  of  Babylon — Nebuchadnezzar’s  Sole  Reign — Captivity  of  Je- 
hoiachin — Josephus’s  Chronology — Age  of  Darius  Hystaspes  at  the 
Capture  of  Babylon — Xerxes  was  the  Cyrus  mentioned  with  Darius 
in  the  Capture  of  Babylon — The  Name  of  Cyrus — The  Legend  of 
Perseus  compared  with  the  Story  of  Cyrus — Persian  Kings  of  the 
Book  of  Ezra — -Succession  of  High-Priests — Captivity  of  the  Third 
Yrearof  Jehoiakim — Captivity  of  the  Nineteenth  Year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar— Captivity  of  the  Twenty-Third  Year  of  Nebuchadnezzar — 
Prophecy  of  the  Destruction  of  Babylon — -The  Period  of  Twenty- 
one  Years — The  Seventy  Weeks  of  Daniel — The  Period  of  Nine 
Hundred  Years — The  Sabbatical  Years  observed  by  Hezekiah  and 
Josiah — The  Period  of  the  Iniquity  of  Israel — The  Interpretation  of 


CONTENTS. 


9 


PAGE 

tho  Three  Hundred  and  Ninety  and  Forty  Days  of  Ezekiel — The 
Seventy  Weeks  of  Daniel — The  Number  Seventy  in  Egyptian  Myth 
— The  Seventy  Years  of  the  Psalmist  and  Herodotus — The  Cycle  of 
Seven  Hundred  and  Seventy  Years — Epoch  of  b.c.  627 — New  Con- 
currence between  Egyptian  and  Jewish  Months — The  Date  of  the 
Destruction  of  the  Temple  by  Nebuchadnezzar 215 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

Generations  of  Jesus  Christ — The  Lists  of  Sts.  Matthew  and  Luke — 
Generations  of  Different  Lengths — Three  Periods  between  Abraham 
and  Christ — First  Period,  from  Abraham  to  Foundation  of  the  Temple 
of  Solomon — Scheme  of  Twelve  Generations  of  One  Hundred  Years — 
Scheme  of  Fourteen  Generations  of  Eighty-four  Years — Scheme  of 
Fourteen  Generations  of  Seventy  Years — Second  Period,  from  the 
Foundation  of  Solomon’s  Temple  to  its  Destruction  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar— Scheme  of  Fourteen  Generations  of  Thirty  Years — Scheme 
of  Fourteen  Generations  of  Twenty-five  Years — Third  Period,  from 
the  Babylonian  Captivity  to  the  Birth  of  Christ — Scheme  of  Four- 
teen Generations  of  Forty-two  Years — Scheme  of  Fourteen  Genera- 
tions of  Forty  Years 231 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

Manetho  and  the  Exodus  of  the  Jews  from  Egypt — First  Story  from 
Josephus — The  Second  Story — The  Two  compared — The  Sallier  Pa- 
pyrus— Feeling  of  the  Egyptians  towards  their  Foreign  Masters  as 
discovered  from  the  Monuments — The  Naturalization  of  Foreign 
Races — Struggles  between  Two  Factions  or  Races — Sallier  Papyrus 
compared  with  the  First  Story — The  Harris  Papyrus — Comparison 
between  it  and  the  First  Story — Alius  the  same  as  Alisphragmuthosis 
— True  Meaning  of  the  Name  Thummosis— The  Sallier  and  Harris 
Papyri  contrasted — The  Hyksos — Chaldean  Shepherd  Kings— Dr. 
Brugsch’s  Explanation  of  the  Term — Asiatic  and  African  Ethiopia 
— The  Cult  of  the  Horse — The  Term  Sus— Connection  between  the 
Eighteenth  Dynasty  and  the  Ethiopian  Kings — Piankhi  and  his  Se- 
mitic Adversaries — Evidence  of  the  Inscription  of  Piankhi  to  the  Cult 
of  the  Horse — Other  Evidences — The  Second  Story  examined — Spec- 
tator of  the  Gods — -Horus  and  Piankhi — Expulsion  of  the  Unclean — 
Who  were  Unclean — Story  of  Lysimachus — Hypothesis  of  the  For- 
mation of  the  Name  Bocchoris — A Portion  of  the  Eighteenth  Dynasty 
compared  with  the  Twenty -second,  Twenty-third,  and  Twenty-fourth 
Dynasties 242 


10 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

PAGE 

Chronology  of  Coins — Coin  of  Antoninus  Pius — Symbolical  and  Enig- 
matical Representations  upon  the  Coins — The  Palm-Branch,  Circle, 
and  Cornucopia — Interpretation  of  Numeral  Letters — Coins  of  Philo- 
pator  and  Arsinoe — Description  of  the  Coin  of  Arsinoe — Its  Date — 

The  Rise  of  Sirius  in  this  Reign — The  Tear  of  the  Era  of  Nabo- 
nassar  upon  the  Coin  of  Philopator — The  Effect  of  the  Decree  of  Ca- 
nopus upon  the  Astronomical  Dates  of  the  Years  of  the  Era — The 
Length  of  Time  of  the  Enforcement  of  the  Decree — The  Restoration 
of  the  Yague  Dates — Epiphanes  Eponymous  on  the  30th  of  Mesori 
and  the  17th  of  Mechir — The  Cycle  of  Nineteen  Years  used  to  mark 
the  Advance  of  the  Tropical  Year  in  the  Yague — Julian  and  Concur- 
rent Egyptian  Date  for  the  Rise  of  Sirius  in  the  Reign  of  Philopator 
— The  Date  of  the  Rise  of  Sirius  by  the  Macedonian  Month — Coin 
of  Philometor — Description  of  the  Coin — Series  of  Nineteen-Year 
Cycles  reckoned  from  b.c.  219 — Interpretation  of  the  Obverse  of  the 
Coin — Interpretation  of  the  Palm-Branch  upon  the  Reverse — Of  the 
Letter  A — Of  the  Letters  IAII — Era  of  the  Ptolemies — Interpreta- 
tion of  the  Five  Hundred  and  Fiftieth  Year  of  the  Era  of  Nabonas- 
sar — Coin  of  Antiochus  VI. — Description  of  the  Coin — Interpreta- 
tion of  the  Obverse — The  Four  Hundred  and  Thirteenth  Year  of 
Nabonassar  on  the  Reverse — The  Year  of  the  Seleucid  Era — Epoch 
of  the  Seleucid  Era — Syro-Macedonian  Year — The  Yague  Year  of 
the  Era — Coin  of  Arsinoe  Philadelphus — Description  of  the  Coin — 

Dr.  Sharpe’s  Reading — New  Reading  proposed — Era  of  Mena — Cele- 
bration of  the  Accession  of  Philadelphus — Similar  Celebration  by 
Rameses  II. — Epoch  of  Era  of  Mena — Date  of  the  Coin — The  Year 
33  of  the  Era  of  the  Ptolemies — Duration  of  the  Egyptian  Mon- 
archy— Dr.  Lepsius — Technical  Character  of  the  Three  Thousand 
Three  Hundred  Years — The  Three  Hundred  and  Thirty  Generations 
of  Herodotus  reduced  to  Thirty-three— The  Turin  Papyrus — Chron- 


ological Table  for  the  Coins 261 

Appendix 281 

I.  A Method  to  calculate  the  Dates  of  New  and  Full  Moons  . . . 281 
II.  Tables  for  determining  Corresponding  Dates  between  the 

Julian  and  the  Egyptian  Yague  Year 291 

III.  How  to  find  the  Day  of  the  Week  for  any  Date 297 

IY.  Advance  of  the  Sidereal  Year  in  the  Yague  Year 299 

Y.  Advance  of  the  Tropical  in  the  Yague  Year  for  Four  Hundred 

and  Fifty  Years 300 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ancient  chronology  is  to  some  extent  a speculative  subject. 
The  causes  of  this  are  the  incomplete  and  conflicting  chronolo- 
gies which  have  been  handed  down  from  the  ancients,  and  the 
efforts  of  modern  scholars  to  bring  order  out  of  confusion,  and 
to  supply  what  is  wanting  to  perfect  a system  which  will  give 
to  the  reigns  of  kings  and  dynasties  their  proper  epochs  in  a 
well-known  year  like  the  Julian. 

The  compilation  of  Manetho,  the  authority  for  Egyptian 
chronology,  was  made  during  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadel- 
phus.  That  he  had  access  to  original  and  authentic  informa- 
tion is  borne  out  by  the  results  of  recent  monumental  discovery, 
but  this  kind  of  confirmation  does  not  extend  to  the  whole  of 
his  chronology.  There  appears  to  have  been  an  effort  upon  the 
part  of  the  early  chronologers  to  form  a comparative  system. 
It  was  to  place  the  chronologies  of  the  Jews,  Egyptians,  Assyr- 
ians, Babylonians,  Persians,  and  Greeks  in  harmonious  relations 
to  each  other.  The  original  work  of  Manetho  is  lost ; we  only 
possess  it  in  the  form  of  copies,  and  these  differ  materially. 
The  Manethonian  numbers  have  been  altered.  This  was  done 
by  more  than  one  hand,  and  more  than  one  object  was  in  view. 
The  copies  profess  to  identify  the  reigns  in  which  certain  Grecian 
chronological  epochs  had  their  origin,  and  as  chronologers  dif- 
fered as  to  these  epochs,  and  as  these  differences  were  not  allowed 
to  affect  the  Egyptian  reigns  in  which  these  epochs  began,  the 
list  of  Manetho  had  to  be  so  changed  that  in  one  copy,  following 
one  system,  the  same  king  had  an  entirely  different  epoch  from 
that  which  he  had  in  another  copy,  adjusted  to  another  system. 
Another  disturbing  element  was  the  misunderstanding  of  Jewish 
chronology.  Modern  chronological  experiments  cannot  be  pro- 
ductive of  real  harm,  even  if  they  are  not  of  much  good,  but  this 
cannot  be  said  of  the  work  of  the  early  chronologers. 


11 


12 


INTRODUCTION. 


Modern  monumental  discovery  lias  brought  to  light  many 
facts  bearing  upon  the  chronology  of  Egypt.  Chronological 
lists  have  been  found  engraved  upon  the  walls  of  temples,  and 
many  inscriptions  discovered  and  translated,  which,  while  con- 
firming Manetho  in  some  particulars,  have  discredited  him  in 
others.  These  have  encouraged  great  departures  from  the 
chronology  in  vogue  up  to  the  time  the  influence  of  modern 
discovery  began  to  make  itself  felt. 

Scholars  have  gone  outside  of  merely  chronological  details, 
and  striven  to  fix  the  epochs  of  certain  kings  by  means  of  astro- 
nomical phenomena,  which  are  recorded  upon  the  monuments 
in  connection  with  a year  in  some  king’s  reign.  All  these  in- 
fluences are  at  work,  controlling  to  a more  or  less  extent  every 
effort  made  to  form  a system  for  the  Egyptians,  and  the  results 
are  diverse  and  conflicting.  Dr.  Brugsch  calls  attention  to  the 
conclusions  reached  by  the  modern  school  of  German  Egyptolo- 
gers. Among  them  there  is  a difference  of  two  thousand  and 
seventy-nine  years  as  to  the  era  of  Mena,  the  first  king.  The 
disparity  is  the  same,  he  points  out,  as  if  a dispute  should  arise 
sixty  centuries  after  our  time  concerning  the  date  of  the  reign 
of  the  Eoman  Emperor  Augustus,  some  placing  his  epoch  b.c. 
207,  and  others  a.d.  1872.  A perfect  chronology  should  fuimish 
accurate  details  of  the  lengths  of  reigns,  a complete  series  of 
successive  reigns,  and  an  epoch  from  which  to  reckon,  chrono- 
logically, the  years,  so  as  to  place  the  history  in  relation  to  the 
present  time.  All  these  are  wanting  to  Egyptian  chronology. 
The  possible  error  as  to  the  epoch  of  the  Persian  invasion  of 
Egypt  is  small,  and  this  will  affect  perhaps  only  one  historical 
synchronism,  and  the  plain  course  for  the  chronologer  to  follow 
is  to  arrange  the  chronology  so  as  to  produce  the  synchronism. 
Owing  to  monumental  discovery,  our  knowledge  of  the  Egyp- 
tian dynasty,  which  came  to  an  end  with  the  Persian  invasion,  is 
chronologically  more  complete  than  that  of  any  other.  Above 
this  there  is  no  certainty  of  the  reigns  of  most  of  the  kings,  or 
the  length  of  the  several  dynasties.  But  the  case  is  not  so 
bad  as  it  would  at  first  sight  appear.  We  certainly  can  do 
without  particular  and  accurate  knowledge  of  every  chrono- 
logical circumstance,  provided  here  and  there  in  the  history  the 
reigns  of  certain  kings  can  be  fixed  by  independent  facts.  This 


INTRODUCTION. 


13 


is  one  of  the  objects  of  this  work,  which  I have  endeavored  to 
carry  out  by  the  identification  of  the  epochs  of  astronomical 
phenomena,  the  dates  of  which  are  recorded  upon  monuments 
erected  by  certain  kings.  If  astronomical  phenomena  are  re- 
corded in  the  terms  of  the  vague  year  (the  traditional  and  his- 
torical year  of  the  Egyptians),  and  if  the  correct  concurrence 
between  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year  is  discovered,  as  the 
periodic  times  of  such  phenomena  are  known  to  modern  astro- 
nomical science,  tables  furnishing  their  recurrent  dates  may  be 
made  for  both  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year.  The  phenomena 
for  which  dates  are  found  are  those  of  the  moon,  eclipses,  heliacal 
risings  of  stars,  and  the  cardinal  points  of  the  tropical  year. 
The  recurrent  times  of  these  phenomena  are  different.  The  case 
is  such  that,  if  an  inscription  should  mention  the  occurrence  of 
one  of  these  upon  a certain  date  of  the  vague  year,  modern 
science,  by  means  of  the  concurrent  dates  of  the  Julian  and  the 
vague  year,  can  determine  in  what  years  such  an  event  was 
possible.  The  record  of  two  different  phenomena  upon  the  same 
date  in  one  inscription,  and  the  recurrence  of  one  or  both  of 
them  on  the  same  date  in  another,  or  other  inscriptions  of  a 
manifestly  different  age,  or  upon  another  date  which  of  itself 
denotes  a different  time,  makes  it  possible  to  establish  the  correct 
epochs  of  the  dates  of  the  inscriptions.  The  historical  periods 
are  not  too  great  or  remote  to  invalidate  conclusions  reached  in 
this  way.  By  such  means  I have  endeavored  to  establish  the 
epochs  of  the  reigns  of  Thutmes  III.,  Rameses  II.,  and  to  con- 
firm the  epoch  of  Takelath  II. 

Incidental  to  this  subject,  the  technical  chronology  of  the 
Egyptians  is  discussed.  Two  facts  are  brought  out, — that  a 
wrong  adjustment  between  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year  has 
prevailed  for  many  centuries,  and  that  the  present  status  of  the 
Julian  is  seven  days  in  error.  The  Julian  year  of  chronology  is 
adjusted  to  have  the  new  moon  following  the  winter  solstice  on 
the  1st  of  January,  b.c.  45.  The  original  Julian,  using  the  dates 
of  the  chronological  Julian,  began  on  the  25th  of  December, 
b.c.  46.  It  is  not  in  use  at  the  present  time,  being  superseded 
by  the  chronological  Julian. 

Following  the  subject  of  Egyptian  chronology,  that  of  the 
Jews  is  considered.  The  chronological  year  of  the  Jews  is  found 

2 


14 


INTRODUCTION. 


to  have  been  the  vague  year,  which  is  used  in  the  forms  of  years 
of  twelve  months  and  years  of  ten  months.  The  chronology, 
considered  by  itself,  is  determined  by  its  own  internal  evidence. 
It  forms  a complete  whole,  and  when  to  any  one  of  the  reigns 
an  epoch  is  given,  those  of  all  the  others  naturally  follow  from 
it.  The  integrity  of  the  chronology  is  independent  of  these 
epochs,  but  it  is  of  the  first  importance  by  their  means  to  place 
it  in  its  true  position  to  the  present  time.  Unfortunately,  the 
dates  of  astronomical  phenomena  are  not  so  readily  got  at  as  in 
the  case  of  Egyptian  inscriptions.  The  evidence  of  these  at  the 
outset  is  principally  inferential,  but  the  same  kind  of  argument 
is  followed.  The  difficulties  are  manj^  and  complex.  I can  but 
briefly  outline  them  here.  In  the  first  place,  the  data  furnished 
by  the  Bible  must  be  arranged  and  construed  so  as  to  conform 
to  the  facts  related.  This  is  not  so  easy  a matter,  because  it 
cannot  be  done  unless  several  kinds  of  years  were  in  use  and  the 
apparently  conflicting  data  made  to  undergo  a transformation 
which  will  reproduce  the  historical  synchronisms  which  are  on 
record.  The  adoption  of  the  vague  for  the  historical  year  has 
to  be  made  upon  the  internal  evidence  of  the  chronology;  we 
have  not  the  same  independent  authority  for  it  as  for  the  Egyp- 
tian year.  This  is  true  of  both  the  year  of  twelve  months  and 
the  year  of  ten  months,  for  the  latter,  by  cycles  of  sixty  months, 
which  are  equal  to  six  years  of  ten  months  and  five  years  of 
twelve  months,  runs  side  by  side  with  the  year  of  twelve  months, 
but  enumerates  one  more  year  in  that  time.  After  the  chro- 
nology is  arranged  to  be  consistent  with  itself,  epochs  are  to  be 
given  to  its  years.  Two  things  are  necessary  to  be  known  to 
accomplish  this : first,  if  any,  what  astronomical  phenomena 
may  be  reasonably  looked  for  at  certain  epochs;  second,  the 
reproduction  of  recorded  synchronisms  between  the  events  of 
Jewish  history  and  the  independent  chronologies  of  other 
nations.  The  astronomical  canon,  or  the  canon  of  Ptolemy, 
furnishes  a list  of  Babylonian  and  Persian  kings  with  their 
chronological  epochs.  The  canon  has  been  long  held  to  be  of 
the  highest  authority,  because,  it  is  said,  the  epochs  of  certain 
kings,  and  the  whole  list  by  means  of  the  year  of  the  era  of 
Nabonassar,  are  astronomically  fixed  by  the  eclipses  which  are 
recorded  as  having  been  observed  on  certain  dates  of  the  Egyp- 


INTRODUCTION. 


15 


tian  vague  year,  giving  in  the  same  connection  the  year  of  the 
era  and  the  regnal  year  of  some  king.  The  Jewish  epochs  are 
found  from  the  canon  by  giving  to  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim 
the  same  epoch  as  the  first  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  on  the 
authority  of  the  Bible,  which  declares  these  regnal  years  to  have 
synchronized.  But  as  it  will  be  shown  that  the  adjustment 
between  the  Egyptian  vague  year  and  the  Julian,  followed  by 
the  canon  as  interpreted  by  the  Almagest  to  identify  the  re- 
corded eclipses,  is  incorrect,  and  consequently  no  eclipses  were 
on  the  recorded  dates  in  those  years,  the  astronomical  basis  of 
the  canon  is  swept  away.  The  lowering  of  the  canon,  which  I 
advocate,  is  prompted  by  the  epochs  which  I have  given  to  the 
Jewish  chronology  independently  of  it,  and  the  changes  made 
are  not  arbitrary, — that  is,  made  simply  for  the  purpose, — but 
they  have  some  sort  of  historical  testimony  in  their  favor.  The 
whole  scheme  rests  largely  on  circumstantial  evidence,  which  is 
stronger  than  any  direct  testimony  which  is  self-contradictory, 
and  which  can  only  be  overcome  by  superior  circumstances,  if 
any  such  can  be  found.  It  is  claimed  for  the  Jewish  scheme 
that  there  is  not  one  single  chronological  statement  in  the  Bible 
from  which  it  does  not  remove  all  improbability,  even  if  some 
subordinate  matters  are  left  in  doubt.  This  is  an  advance  upon 
the  chronology  usually  followed.  All  conflicts  between  it  and 
the  chi'onologies  of  other  nations  are  removed,  which  cannot  be 
done  by  the  old  system.  Even  if  the  reduction  of  the  era  of 
Nabonassar  be  disallowed  by  a wiser  criticism  than  that  followed 
in  this  work,  still  the  Jewish  chronology  will  stand.  It  will 
only  be  necessary  to  increase  all  its  epochs  eighteen  3’ears,  and 
to  cause  some  of  the  astronomical  conditions  prevailing  at  the 
era  of  the  Tabernacle  to  be  dominant  at  the  epoch  of  the  exodus. 
I have  placed  the  epoch  of  the  exodus  in  b.c.  1397,  and  the  era 
of  the  Tabernacle  in  the  following  year, — b.c.  1396.  If  the  epoch 
of  the  exodus  should  be  raised  to  b.c.  1415,  which  is  nineteen 
years  earlier  than  b.c.  1396,  the  lunar  dates  in  respect  to  the 
tropical  year  will  be  about  the  same  in  b.c.  1415  as  in  b.c.  1396. 
Since  I have  acted  upon  the  assumption  that  the  political  epoch 
of  the  nation  was  in  b.c.  1397,  and  the  technical  epoch  in  b.c. 
1396,  the  change  of  the  epoch  of  the  exodus  to  b.c.  1415  will 
cause  the  technical  and  the  political  epochs  to  coincide,  and 


16 


INTRODUCTION. 


Abib  is  to  have  the  same  lunar  dates  in  b.c.  1415  as  in  b.c.  1396, 
and  also  to  have  the  vernal  equinox  upon  the  1st  of  that  month. 

In  the  brief  outline  here  given  the  reader  may  obtain  some 
idea  of  the  scope  of  this  work.  Much  of  the  success  of  the 
Egyptian  portion,  if  competent  criticism  shall  decide  in  its 
favor,  is  due  to  the  admirable  and  faithful  history  of  Egypt  under 
the  Pharaohs  by  Dr.  Brugsch.  As  my  work  is  dependent  upon 
the  accuracy  of  the  translator  of  Egyptian  inscriptions,  it  is  of 
the  first  importance  that  they  should  be  rendered  in  their  purity, 
and  not  transformed  to  suit  the  mistaken  but  honest  views  of 
the  historian.  Laying  every  other  argument  aside,  the  results 
are  alone  sufficient  to  prove  the  truthfulness  of  the  facts  upon 
which  they  are  founded.  Commenting  upon  Theon,  who  in  his 
formula  for  the  rising  of  the  Dog-star  calculates  from  the  era  of 
Menophres,  Dr.  Sharpe  writes  : “ And  Theon  calls  the  beginning 
of  the  great  Egjrptian  cycle  of  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  years, 
which  began  in  the  year  b.c.  1321,  the  era  of  Menophres,  and 
thus  seems  to  fix  the  year  in  which  either  his  reign  began  or  he 
reformed  the  calendar.”  One  point  of  agreement  between 
myself  and  Dr.  Sharpe  is  the  rise  of  Sirius  on  the  1st  of  Thoth 
in  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.,  who  is  Menophres.  Latterly,  the 
more  favored  plan  has  been  to  place  this  event  in  the  reign  of 
Eameses  II. ; that  is,  the  heliacal  rising  of  b.c.  1321  or  1322,  by 
some  found  to  have  been  in  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.,  is  by 
others  given  to  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.,  thus  causing  a difference 
of  about  two  hundred  and  eighty  years  in  the  epochs  of  these 
kings.  My  method  of  obtaining  the  epochs  of  Thutmes  III.’s 
reign  is  entirely  independent  of  the  rise  of  Sirius  or  any  calcu- 
lation by  the  sidereal  year.  More  than  this,  the  sole  reign  of 
Thutmes  III.,  which  began  in  b.c.  1318,  as  determined  by  the 
chronology  of  this  work,  had  for  its  era  the  rise  of  Sirius  on  the 
day  of  the  full  moon,  on  the  1st  of  Thoth.  Another  rising  of 
Sirius  is  found  for  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.,  which  is  confirmed 
by  an  inscription  clearly  indicating  such  an  event,  even  to  the 
year  and  day  of  the  month,  the  chronology  in  this  case  also 
being  independent  of  such  a fact,  but  furnishing  the  means  by 
which  it  is  discovered. 

Concerning  the  Jewish  portion,  it  may  be  said  I have  found 
my  way  by  a path  not  often  trodden,  but  which  was  never 


INTRODUCTION. 


17 


obliterated.  Drawn  by  the  use  which  Niebuhr  had  made  of  the 
Romulian  year,  or  year  of  ten  months,  to  solve  some  of  the 
problems  of  Roman  histoiy,  I am  led  to  apply  the  same  kind  of 
year  to  Jewish  chronology.  One  or  two  trial  tests  were  suffi- 
cient to  encourage  the  effort  which  has  produced  the  results 
which  are  set  before  the  reader.  Nothing  in  this  has  helped  me 
more  than  a determination  to  adhere  strictly  to  the  Bible  account, 
and  to  adopt  that  scheme  which  required  no  sacrifice  of  any 
historical  statement,  whether  biblical  or  otherwise.  Any  other 
course  would  leave  the  chronology  to  a certain  extent  doubtful. 
Little  good  can  be  got  by  the  advocacy  of  one  set  of  historical 
facts  to  the  exclusion  of  others  when  the  critical  test  by  which 
the  last  is  done  is  some  chronological  scheme  with  which  they 
disagree.  Doubt  is  thi-own  upon  the  whole  subject  if  there  is  a 
conflict  of  testimony.  With  the  canon  of  Ptolemy,  the  truth  of 
which  has  been  attacked,  it  is  different.  Real  history,  and  not 
chronological  tables  compiled  or  emended  long  aftor  the  events 
to  which  they  apply,  is  meant.  One  of  the  chief  arguments 
against  the  canon  is  its  disagreement  with  other  histories.  The 
line  of  my  criticism  is  not  in  the  direction  of  condemning  the 
canon  in  its  original  state,  but  rather  to  show  that  if  the  state- 
ments of  Ptolemy  in  the  Almagest  were  ever  true,  they  are  not 
so  now.  Evidently  the  canon  has  undergone  some  change  to 
render  plausible  the  particular  astronomical  basis  which  is 
claimed  for  it.  The  alterations  proposed  are  those  which  permit 
of  a similar  astronomical  foundation.  Here  I have  gone  further, 
and  indicated  the  astronomic  chronological  system  to  which 
they  belong.  It  is  tentative  in  character.  Substantially  the 
same  end  may  be  obtained  by  other  changes,  but  none  appeared 
so  satisfactory  as  those  adopted.  Better  and  complete  results, 
it  is  hoped,  may  be  reached  through  future  monumental  dis- 
covery. Of  one  thing  we  may  be  confident, — they  will  agree 
with  the  discoveries  already  made.  On  this  account,  it  is 
believed,  they  will  add  to,  and  not  detract  from,  the  truth  of  the 
conclusions  here  reached.  Knowledge  of  the  chronology  of  the 
past,  freed  from  the  large  element  of  conjecture  which  has 
hitherto  prevailed  in  all  opinions,  is  particularly  the  demand  of 
the  age.  In  certain  quarters  there  is  a tendency  to  treat  with 
scorn  the  so-called  demands  of  the  age.  The  failure  of  crude 

2* 


18 


INTRODUCTION. 


theories  and  rash  experiments  which  were  in  defiance  of  the 
settled  experience  of  mankind  has  encouraged  this  attitude. 
But  what  I mean  by  the  demand  of  the  age  has  been  the  demand 
of  every  age,  which  is,  simply,  truth.  Until  quite  recently  the 
historical  portions  of  the  Old  Testament  have  had  no  rival  worthy 
of  the  name  in  their  particular  domain,  but  monumental  dis- 
covery has  produced  other  witnesses  of  the  past,  who  speak  not 
by  hearsay,  but  as  participants  in  the  events  of  which  they 
relate.  My  purpose  has  been  to  show  that  these  agree  with 
the  history  as  told  in  the  Old  Testament  or  Hebrew  Bible. 


PART  I. 

EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  I. 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  EGYPTIANS. 

The  Egyptian  vague  year  contained  three  hundred  and  sixty- 
five  days,  which  were  divided  into  twelve  months,  all  of  thirty 
days,  with  five  intercalary  days  added  in  between  every  two 
years.  If  it  is  said  the  Egyptian  year,  although  of  three  hundred 
and  sixty-five  days,  was  technically  only  of  three  hundred  and 
sixty  days,  the  distinction  is  not  trifling,  nor  is  the  subject 
necessarily  confused  by  the  statement.  It  is  not  meant  that  the 
intercalary  days  formed  no  part  of  the  three  hundred  and  sixty- 
five,  but  that  a time-measure,  called  a year,  was  of  three  hundred 
and  sixty  days;  it  fell  short  of  the  period  to  be  measured,  to 
which  is  also  applied  the  term  year,  five  days  (not  counting  a 
portion  of  a day),  and  this  number  of  days  are  leaped  over  by 
the  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days,  so  the  next  jTear  of 
this  kind  may  commence  on  a three  hundred  and  sixty-sixth 
day.  Chronology  has  a philosophical  as  well  as  a practical  side. 
Time,  as  an  appreciable  part  of  eternity,  is  preceded  and  followed 
by  durations  which  form  no  part  of  it.  The  future  becomes  a 
part  of  time  only  as  portions  of  it  lose  that  character  and  become 
present,  and  the  past  only  as  it  has  in  this  manner  been  at  some 
recognized  period  a present  is  it  a part  of  time.  Time  is  pre- 
ceded and  followed  by  unformed  durations, — that  is,  periods,  the 
measurements  of  which  havenot  been  experiential.  An  expression 
for  eternity  is  time  preceded  and  followed  by  intercalary  periods 
of  infinite  durations.  The  distinction  between  a duration  which 
is  experiential  and  one  which  is  not  does  not  apply  to  time 
which  is  always  experimental,  but  the  distinction  between  the 
intercalary  days  and  the  year  has  something  analogous  to  it. 
The  case  of  the  Roman  soldiers  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  who 
were  required  to  serve  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days  and 
only  received  pay  for  three  hundred  and  sixty  days,  is  to  this 
point.  The  myth  of  the  five  intercalary  days,  which  were 
festivals  in  the  Egyptian  year,  is  based  upon  the  doctrine  that 

- 21 


22 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


these  days  belonged  to  neither  month  nor  year.  The  Sothic 
cycle  consisted  of  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-one  vague  years, 
and  as  this  many  equal  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  Julian  years, 
the  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-first  year  was  regarded  by  the 
later  Egyptians  as  intercalary  and  belonging  to  God.  The  only 
part  of  duration  which  belongs  to  man  is  time;  eternity  belongs 
to  God.  Attention  is  called  to  this  character  of  the  intercalary 
days,  because  some  writers  have  advanced  the  view  that  the 
year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days  and  that  of  three  hundred 
and  sixty-five  were  as  time-measures  of  different  values,  holding 
the  years  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days  were  the  ones  used 
for  the  purpose  of  records  and  reigns  of  kings.  This  notion  ap- 
pears to  have  caused  certain  alterations  in  Eusebius’s  and  Afri- 
canus’s  copies  of  the  list  of  Manetho.  These  writers  in  their 
copies  agree  as  to  the  king  reigning  at  the  time  of  the  Trojan 
war.  Another  list,  called  the  Old  Chronicle,  has  many  points  of 
resemblance  to  those  of  Africanus  and  Eusebius.  The  following 
table  shows  the  dynasties  of  the  third  book  of  Manetho, — that 
is,  from  the  twentieth  to  the  thirty-first  dynasties,  inclusive.  It 
exhibits  only  the  totals  of  years  of  each.  The  figures  in  brackets 
to  the  right  of  certain  dynastic  totals  are  what  the  regal  years 
correctly  add,  there  being  in  some  instances  a difference  between 
the  sum  set  as  a total  and  the  correct  addition. 


Old  Chronicle. 

Africanus. 

Eusebius. 

Dy- 

nasty. 

No. 

Kings. 

Years. 

No. 

Kings. 

Years. 

No. 

Kings. 

Years. 

20 

8 

228 

12 

135 

12 

172 

21 

6 

121 

7 

130  [114] 

7 

130 

22 

3 

48 

9 

120  [116] 

3 

44  [49] 

23 

2 

19 

4 

28  [89  or  92] 

3 

44 

24 

3 

44 

1 

6 

1 

6 

25 

3 

44 

3 

40 

3 

44 

26 

7 

177 

9 

150.6  mo.  [106.6  mo.] 

9 

167 [171] 

27 

5 

124 

8 

124.4  mo. 

8 

120. 4mo. 

28 

1 

6 

1 

6 

29 

57  I39 

4 

2 f 20.4  mo. 

5 

2 f 21.4  mo. 

30 

1 

57  \ 18 

3 

S J 88 

3 

J \ 20 

31 

3 

sl  9 

3 

B (16 

38 

862 

64 

807.2  mo. 

58 

790.8mo. 

TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  EGYPTIANS. 


23 


The  Old  Chronicle  omits  the  thirty-first  dynasty,  but  its  last 
two  reign  fifty-seven  years,  and  the  last  three  of  Eusebius  reign 
fifty-seven  years  and  four  months.  As  the  Old  Chronicle  omits 
all  portions  of  years,  it  apparently  ends  its  list  at  the  same  time 
as  that  of  Eusebius.  All  these  lists  end  at  b.c.  332,  the  date  of 
the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  Alexander  the  Great. 

EPOCH  OP  THE  CAPTURE  OP  TROY. 

Africanus  and  Eusebius  place  the  capture  of  Troy  in  the  reign 
of  Thuoris,  the  last  king  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty.  According 
to  both  of  these  copyists  his  reign  was  short,  only  lasting  seven 
years.  It  cannot  be  far  wrong  to  assume  that  its  close  and  the 
capture  of  Troy  had  the  same  epoch.  By  the  Old  Chronicle  we 
obtain  eight  hundred  and  sixty-two  years  as  intervening  between 
the  close  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty  and  b.c.  332,  which  will  give 
1194  as  the  epoch.  The  epoch  of  the  capture  of  Troy,  according 
to  Clement  of  Alexandria,  was  b.c.  1193.  The  epoch  of  1183  for 
the  capture  of  Troy,  which  is  the  one  commonly  adopted,  may 
be  obtained  for  the  Old  Chronicle  in  the  following  way : The 
eight  hundred  and  sixty-two  years,  if  of  three  hundred  and  sixty 
days,  which  is  a year  ascribed  by  some  writers  to  the  Egyptians, 
when  reduced  to  yeax*s  of  thi’ee  hundred  and  sixty-five  days  will 
lose  eleven  yeai’s  in  the  count,  and  the  epoch  previously  obtained 
becomes  1183  b.c. 

Africanus  gives  for  this  period  eight  hundred  and  seven  years 
and  two  months,  but  by  the  correct  additions  these  are  decreased 
sixty -four  yeai’s,  and  increased  sixty-one  or  sixty-four  years.  By 
various  combinations  of  these  discrepant  numbers  quite  a number 
of  possible  totals  in  addition  may  be  obtained.  One  of  these  is 
formed  by  increasing  eight  hundred  and  seven  years  by  the 
difference  between  twenty-eight  and  ninety-two  years,  two  of 
the  totals  of  the  twenty-third  dynasty.  This  will  inci’ease  the 
period  sixty-four  years,  and  by  taking  the  correct  additions  of 
the  twenty-first  and  twenty-second  dynasties,  instead  of  those  set 
down,  the  pei’iod  will  be  deci'eased  twenty  yeai’s,  or  the  whole 
amount  to  be  added  is  (64 — 20)  forty-four  years,  which,  we  may 
notice,  is  the  difference  between  the  amount  given  to  the  twenty- 
sixth  dynasty,  one  hundx-ed  and  fifty  years  and  six  months,  and 
the  correct  addition,  one  hundred  and  six  yeax’s  and  six  months. 


24 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


This  one  hundred  and  six  yeai’s  and  six  months  is  caused  by 
the  omission  of  forty-four  years,  which  by  both  Eusebius  and 
the  monuments  belonged  to  King  Amosis,  who  is  put  down 
in  Africanus’s  list  as  a king,  but  with  the  years  of  his  reign 
omitted.  The  total  of  eight  hundred  and  seven  years,  if  in- 
creased forty-four  years,  will  amount  to  eight  hundred  and 
fifty-one  years,  which  gives  for  the  epoch  of  the  twentieth 
dynasty,  b.c.  1183,  the  epoch  of  the  capture  of  Troy  according 
to  Eratosthenes. 

The  epoch  of  the  capture  of  Troy  for  Eusebius  may  be  b.c. 
1127,  tbe  Trojan  epoch  given  by  Kallimachus.  The  794 -J-  years 
between  the  capture  of  Troy  and  b.c.  332  to  produce  this  last 
epoch  are  obtained  in  the  following  way.  The  twenty-seventh 
dynasty  of  Eusebius,  wbich  is  that  of  the  Persians,  is  put  down 
as  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  and  four  months.  The  Old 
Chronicle  and  Africanus  give  this  dynasty  one  hundred  and 
twenty-four  years.  Eusebius  has  included  four  years  in  the 
previous  dynasty  (twenty-sixth),  but  has  omitted  them  in  the 
addition,  the  total  being  put  at  one  hundred  and  sixty-seven 
years,  the  correct  addition  one  hundred  and  seventy-one  years. 
This  increases  the  total  to  794-)-  years.  It  will  be  found  upon 
a scrutiny  of  these  numbers,  which  we  have  obtained  for  the 
interval  between  b.c.  332  and  the  fall  of  Troy,  that  they 
generally  stand  to  each  other  as  360  to  365.  That  is,  the  eight 
hundred  and  sixty-two  years  of  the  Old  Chronicle,  if  of  three 
hundred  and  sixty  days  to  the  year,  equal  the  eight  hundred  and 
fifty-one  years  we  have  obtained  for  Africanus,  if  the  last  are  of 
three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days  to  the  year.  Again,  if  the 
total  obtained  for  Eusebius  of  794-)-  years  are  of  three  hundred 
and  sixt}r-five  days,  and  if  they  are  increased  in  number  to  be 
represented  by  years  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days,  that 
number  is  805-)-  years,  which  is  only  two  years  less  than  the 
total  807-)-  years  of  Africanus  before  it  is  increased  forty-four 
years.  The  Egyptians  had  not  a year  of  three  hundred  and 
sixty  days  independent  of  one  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five 
days,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  at  one  time  in  their  history 
they  used  one  like  the  Babylonian,  in  which  case,  by  the  cycle 
of  six  years,  it  was  substantially  like  that  of  three  hundred  and 
sixty-five  days. 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  EGYPTIANS. 


25 


The  principles  relating  to  the  intercalary  days  arc  further  dis- 
cussed in  connection  with  the  Jewish  system. 

The  Egyptian  months  were  twelve,  named  as  follows : First, 
Thoth  ; second,  Phaophi;  third,  Athyr;  fourth,  Khoiakh  ; fifth, 
Tybi ; sixth,  Mechir;  seventh,  Phamenoth  ; eighth,  Pharmuthi ; 
ninth,  Pachons ; tenth,  Payni ; eleventh,  Epiphi ; twelfth, 
Mesori. 

The  year  was  divided  into  three  seasons.  According  to  the 
nomenclature  of  Dr.  Brugsch,  the  first  season  was  Sa,  the  com- 
mencement or  inundation  ; the  second  was  Per , winter  or  seed- 
time ; the  third,  Sen,  summer  or  harvest.  Thoth  is  the  first 
month  of  the  first  season,  Sa,  or  inundation.  The  Egyptian 
year  being  vague,  none  of  its  months  will  keep  their  places  in 
the  seasons,  but  fall  back  from  them  at  the  rate  of  about  seven 
days  in  twenty-nine  years.  Since  the  three  seasons  do  not 
exactly  fit  the  natural  conditions  of  the  year  in  Egypt,  it  is  im- 
possible by  them  alone  to  determine  the  exact  time  when  the 
1st  of  Thoth  occupies  its  normal  place  at  the  beginning  of  the 
first  season.  If  the  new  and  full  moon  following  the  summer 
solstice,  or  the  rise  of  Sirius  on  one  of  these  lunar  dates,  entered 
as  an  element,  it  could  be  done. 

In  connection  with  the  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five 
days  the  Egyptians  employed  several  cycles.  Three  of  these 
are  respectively  called  the  Sothic,  the  Henti,  and  the  Hib-set, 
which  was  called  by  the  Greeks  Triakonteris.  Before  discuss- 
ing these,  it  is  necessary  to  correctly  adjust  the  Egyptian  year 
to  the  Julian.  We  need  the  corresponding  dates  of  these  two 
years,  not  only  to  explain  these  cycles,  but  also  for  the  right 
understanding  of  certain  monumental  inscriptions  of  great  his- 
torical importance. 


3 


26 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


CHAPTER  IT. 

THE  ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN. 

The  Julian  year  as  applied  to  events  prior  to  the  reformation 
of  the  Roman  year  is  simply  a year  by  convention  for  the  pur- 
poses of  chronology ; it  had  no  existence  previous  to  the  year 
b.c.  45.  It  is  none  the  less  of  great  usefulness,  for  all  dates  are 
readily  reducible  to  its  terms,  and  thereby  conveyed  in  a precise 
form  and  one  enabling  us  to  obtain  some  intelligent  notion  of 
the  time  of  the  events  with  which  they  are  connected.  In 
adopting  the  Julian  year  for  this  purpose,  I in  no  way  assent  to 
the  historical  correctness  of  that  year  as  now  understood. 
Whether  Julius  Caesar  commenced  the  year  with  the  1st  of 
January  about  at  the  winter  solstice,  or  with  the  1st  of  Jan- 
uary seven  days  later,  are  questions  which  do  not  interfere  with 
its  present  use,  providing  its  character  is  known,  which  is  that 
of  a year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days,  with  an  inter- 
calary day  every  fifth  year  (that  is,  one  in  every  four  years), 
beginning  with  a bissextile  37ear  b.c.  45,  and  with  the  1st  of 
January  on  the  day  of  the  new  moon  following  the  winter 
solstice. 

The  common  mode  of  reckoning  by  the  vulgar  era  of  the 
birth  of  Christ  is  followed.  This  makes  the  year  b.c.  1 to  be  a 
bissextile  year.  According  to  the  Julian,  any  year  after  Christ 
which  is  divisible  by  four  without  a remainder  is  a leap-year, 
and  any  year  before  Christ  which  when  divided  by  four  gives 
one  as  remainder  is  of  the  same  character. 

The  vague  year  was  still  observed  in  Egypt  at  the  time  of  the 
reformation  of  the  Roman  year  by  Julius  Caesar.  If  its  dates 
in  the  Julian  at  that  time  or  later  are  on  record,  and  the  histories 
of  the  two  years  being  known,  it  would  seem  to  be  an  easy 
matter  to  arrange  a series  of  the  two,  with  corresponding  dates, 
which  will  extend  many  centuries  backward.  And  so  it  would 
be  were  the  two  histories  of  these  years  accurately  known. 


ADJUSTMENT  OP  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  27 

This  does  not  seem  to  have  been  the  case,  as  the  reader  may 
judge  later  on  in  the  discussion.  In  comparing  the  two  years,  I 
begin  with  a date  in  the  Egyptian  year  of  an  astronomical  phe- 
nomenon for  which  a corresponding  date  in  the  Julian  has  been 
calculated. 

Timocharis,  the  astronomer,  “has  left  an  observation  of  the 
place  of  Venus  on  the  seventeenth  day  of  the  month  Mesori,  in 
the  thirteenth  year  of  this  reign,  which  by  the  modern  tables 
of  the  planets  is  known  to  have  been  on  the  eighth  day  of 
October,  b.c.  272.”  * This  was  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Philadel- 
phus.  Evidence  will  be  given  further  on  to  prove  that  up  to 
this  time  the  vague  year  had  remained  unchanged. 

There  are  two  inscriptions  which  throw  some  light  upon  the 
condition  of  the  Egyptian  year  between  b.c.  238  and  b.c.  196. 
The  decree  of  Canopus f is  dated  “In  the  year  IX.,  7th  of  the 
month  Apellmus,  the  17th  of  Tybi.”  It  informs  us  this  was  “on 
the  day  of  the  rising  of  the  Divine  Sothis  which  is  called  the 
New  Year  in  his  name.”  ...  “At  present  it  occurs  in  his  ninth 
year  in  the  first  day  of  Payni.”  . . . “But  as  the  case  will 
occur,  that  the  rise  of  Sothis  advances  to  another  day  every 
four  years,  the  day  of  the  celebration  of  this  feast  shall  not  pass 
along,  but  it  shall  be  celebrated  on  the  first  day  of  Payni,  and 
the  feast  shall  be  celebrated  as  in  the  ninth  year;”  . . . “there- 
fore it  shall  be  that  the  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days, 
and  the  five  days  added  to  them,”  . . . “ so  one  day,  a feast  of 
the  benevolent  gods,  be  from  this  day  after  every  four  years 
added  to  the  five  epagomenm  before  the  New  Year.”  This  was 
in  the  ninth  year  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  and  the  inscription 
further  informs  that  this  was  also  done  in  order  to  keep  the 
seasons  to  the  same  places  in  the  year  they  then  held.  Calcu- 
lating from  b.c.  272,  when  the  17th  of  Mesori  fell  on  the  8th  of 
October,  it  is  found  that  the  1st  of  Thoth  fell  on  the  19th  of 
October  in  the  year  b.c.  238,  and  the  1st  of  Payni  the  same 
year  was  on  the  16th  of  July.  Now,  it  is  known  that  this  or- 
dinance, if  it  were  ever  observed,  it  was  only  for  a short  time. 
That  it  was  carried  into  effect,  and  a day  every  four  years  added 


* “ History  of  Egypt”  (Samuel  Sharpe),  chap.  viii.  (39). 
f “Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  viii. 


28 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


to  the  vague  for  a while,  must  be  admitted  if  any  significance  is 
to  be  given  to  the  language  of  the  priests,  and  any  credit  to  their 
right  to  regulate  such  matters.  The  presumption  is  they  con- 
tinued to  add  a day  every  four  years  until  they  satisfied  them- 
selves that  it  was  unnecessary  to  continue  the  practice.  It 
appears  that  they  had  two  objects  in  view  : one,  that  Sirius 
(Sothis)  should  continue  to  rise  heliacally  on  the  1st  of  Payni ; 
the  other,  that  the  seasons  should  thereby  be  made  fixed  in  the 
year,  and  not  left  to  advance  as  they  always  will  in  the  vague. 
Considering  these  separately,  the  following  facts  concerning  the 
sidereal  j7ear  may  be  noticed. 

The  gain  of  the  sidereal  year  over  the  vague  for  forty  years  is 
ten  days,  and  six  hours  plus.  Now,  if  for  forty  years  one  day 
had  been  added  every  four  years,  then  at  the  end  of  the  term 
ten  such  days  would  be  intercalated,  and  the  difference  of  six 
hours  plus  in  the  rising  of  the  “ Divine  Sothis”  is  marked  enough 
to  be  clearly  distinguished.  This  is  the  mean  annual  differ- 
ence between  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year  which  the  priests 
desired  to  overcome.  This  could  have  satisfied  them  that  in 
one  hundred  and  sixty  years  the  sidereal  would  advance  one 
day  in  a year  like  the  Julian,  and  that  instead  of  keeping  the 
1st  of  Payni  to  the  rising  of  Sirius,  it  would  fall  behind  at 
that  rate,  and  consequently  lead  to  the  abandonment  of  the 
practice.  Forty  years  is  a period  belonging  to  the  sidereal  and 
the  vague  years.  It  is  one-fourth  of  one  hundred  and  sixty 
years,  in  which  time  the  sidereal  advances  forty-one  days 
plus,  a period  only  twenty-eight  minutes  and  forty  seconds 
longer  than  full  days.  The  forty  stand  to  one  hundred  and 
sixty  as  one  year  to  four:  to  every  four  years  one  day 
is  added,  so  to  every  four  periods  of  forty  one  day  also  is 
added,  making  forty-one  in  all ; and,  if  the  vague  year  is  left 
unintercalated,  this  marks  the  advance  of  the  sidereal  in  that 
year. 

The  other  reason  for  adding  this  intercalaiy  day  was  to 
prevent  the  seasons  from  wandering  through  the  vague  3Tear. 
Perhaps  more  importance  was  attached  to  this  than  to  the  rising 
of  Sirius.  This  portion  of  the  decree  is  as  follows:  “ But  that 
these  feast-days  shall  be  celebrated  in  definite  seasons  for  them 
to  keep  forever,  and  after  the  plan  of  the  heaven  established  on 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  29 


this  day,  and  that  the  case  shall  not  occur,  that  all  the  Egyptian 
festivals,  now  celebrated  in  wintor,  shall  not  be  celebrated  some 
time  or  other  in  summer,  on  account  of  the  precession  of  the 
rising  of  the  Divine  Sothis  by  one  day  in  the  course  of  four 
years;  and  other  festivals  celebrated  in  the  summer,  in  this 
country,  shall  not  be  celebrated  in  winter,  as  has  occasionally 
occurred  in  past  times;  therefore  it  shall  be  that  the  year  of 
three  hundred  and  sixty  days,  and  the  five  days  added  to  their 
end,  so  one  day  as  a feast  of  Benevolent  Gods  be  from  this  after 
every  four  years  added  to  the  five  epagomense  before  the  New 
Year,  whereby  all  men  shall  learn  that  what  was  a little  defective 
in  the  order  as  regards  the  seasons  of  the  year.”  We  have  seen 
that  the  addition  of  a day  every  four  years  failed  to  keep  the 
“ Divine  Sothis”  to  the  1st  of  Payni,  the  Canopic  year  at  the  end 
of  forty  years  being  six  hours  plus  behind  the  sidereal.  In  a 
like  manner  they  discovered  the  seasons  were  not  keeping  their 
places  in  the  year,  but  were  falling  back  in  the  new  year  even 
faster  than  the  sidereal  year  was  advancing.  The  proper  number 
of  vague  years  for  an  intercalation  of  ten  days  to  produce  tropi- 
cal, or  years  of  the  seasons,  is  forty-two.  These  are  longer  than 
forty-two  vague  years  by  ten  days,  four  hours  plus.  The  ten 
intercalary  days  fall  within  a period  of  forty-two  vague  years, — 
that  is,  between  b.c.  238  and  b.c.  196. 

The  other  inscription  alluded  to  is  that  of  the  Eosetta  stone. 
The  preface  to  the  English  rendition  of  the  French  translation 
by  M.  Letronne  (“Eecords  of  the  Past,”  vol.  iv.)  places  its  date 
in  b.c.  198,  or  forty  years  after  the  decree  of  Canopus.  This  is 
a mistake.  The  ninth  year  of  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  to  which  the 
dates  of  the  Eosetta  stone  refer,  began  in  b.c.  197,  with  1st  of 
Thoth  concui’rent  with  October  8.  In  no  case  could  the  ninth 
year  of  this  king  have  fallen  in  b.c.  198,  unless  we  alter  all  our 
opinions  concerning  the  reigns  of  the  kings  in  Ptolemy’s  Canon. 
These  have  been  known  as  those  containing  full  years,  but  if 
they  do  not,  then  as  between  b.c.  238  and  b.c.  196  the  reigns  of 
Euergetes  and  Philopator  came  to  an  end,  and  if  they  are  not 
given  in  full  years,  the  first  year  of  the  successor  of  each  of 
these  kings  overlaps  each  of  their  last  years,  thus  reducing  the 
period  two  years.  In  this  case  the  ninth  year  of  Epiphanes 
will  fall  in  b.c.  198.  But  the  years  in  Ptolemy’s  Canon  are  all 

3* 


30 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


full  years;  that  is,  these  overlappings  are  already  allowed,  and 
the  list  may  not  be  reduced  in  the  manner  above  described. 

The  inscription  of  the  Rosetta  stone,  so  far  as  it  concerns  our 
purpose,  is  as  follows : It  is  dated  “ the  4th  of  the  month  Xan- 
dikos,  and  the  18th  of  the  month  of  the  Egyptians,  Mechir.” 
It  recites,  “Since  the  30th  of  Mesori,  when  the  king’s  birthday 
is  celebrated,  as  also  the  17th  of  Mechir,  when  he  received 
the  crown  from  his  father,  (the  Priests)  have  recognized  them 
as  eponymous  in  the  temples;”  . . . “that  they  should  be  cele- 
brated in  honor  of  him  by  a panegyry  in  the  temples  of  Egypt, 
monthly  that  they  should  celebrate  a feast  and  panegyry”  . . . 
“ yearly  in  all  the  Temples  of  the  country,  from  1st  of  Thoth, 
during  five  days.”  While  there  may  be  some  uncertainty  as  to 
the  length  of  time  the  decree  of  Canopus  was  enforced,  there  is 
none  of  the  fact  that  the  vague  year  again  became  the  Egyptian 
year,  and  I propose  to  show  that  at  the  time  of  the  inscription 
of  the  Rosetta  stone  it  was  in  force.  The  first  hypothesis  is 
that  ten  days  were  added  to  the  vague  between  b.c.  238  and 
B.c.  196.  The  second  hypothesis  is  that  after  they  abandoned  the 
Canopic  year  they  re-established  the  vague  year  by  increasing 
the  dates  ten  days;  that  is,  the  1st  of  Thoth  became  the  11th 
of  Thoth,  etc.  Whether  the  number  was  ten  or  even  less  than 
ten,  it  does  not  affect  the  proposition  that  the  date  18th  of 
Mechir  of  the  Rosetta  stone  was  a date  of  the  regular  vague 
year,  and  that  its  concurrence  with  the  Julian  will  be  the  same 
as  if  there  had  been  no  extra  days  added  to  the  vague  year ; and, 
calculating  from  the  concurrence  in  b.c.  272,  when  from  the 
observation  of  the  planet  Venus  by  Timocharis  we  know  the 
17th  of  Mesori  fell  on  the  8th  of  October,  the  concurrence  of  the 
18th  of  Mechir  in  b.c.  196  is  found  to  be  March  24. 

The  dates  30th  of  Mesori  and  17th  of  Mechir  are  without  cor- 
responding dates  of  Macedonian  months.  The  date  18th  of 
Mechir,  concurring  with  the  4th  of  Xandikos,  belongs  to  the 
ninth  year  of  Epiphanes,  which  by  the  principle  of  the  Canon 
began  in  b.c.  197  with  the  1st  of  Thoth,  concurrent  with  Octo- 
ber 8.  The  decree  of  Canopus  and  the  Rosetta  stone  put  us  in 
possession  of  two  sets  of  double  dates.  The  decree  of  Canopus 
declares  that  in  the  ninth  year  of  Euergetes  the  17th  of  Tybi 
concurred  with  the  7th  of  Apellams.  The  ninth  year  of  Euergetes 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  31 

began  in  b.c.  239,  and  came  to  an  end  in  October,  b.c.  238.  The 
date  17th  of  Tybi  is  in  b.c.  238,  and  concurs  with  March  4. 
The  Eosetta  stone  recites  that  in  the  ninth  year  of  Epiph- 
anes  the  18th  of  Mechir  concurred  with  the  4th  of  Xandikos. 
I place  this  in  b.c.  196,  when  the  18th  of  Mechir  concurred  with 
March  24. 

Since  the  Macedonian  months  were  lunar,  and  the  comparison 
is  between  them  and  the  regular  vague  year,  the  lunar  dates  for 
the  vague  years  b.c.  238  and  b.c.  196  may  be  calculated,  and  they 
should  agree  with  those  of  the  Macedonian  months.  With  the 
17th  of  Tybi,  concurring  with  the  7th  of  Apellseus,  b.c.  238,  the 
1st  of  Dius  of  the  Macedonian  year  fell  on  the  11th  of  Khoiakh, 
which  concurred  with  the  27th  of  January.  In  this  year  the 
conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon  was  on  the  3d  of  February; 
consequently  the  1st  of  Dius  was  at  the  third  quarter  of  the 
moon,  and  what  was  true  of  Dius  was  also  true  of  the  first  of  all 
the  other  Macedonian  months.  This  is  peculiar,  because  usually 
the  old  lunar  months  began  with  the  visible  new  moon.  But 
upon  consideration  it  will  be  seen  how  perfectly  this  is  adapted 
to  the  conditions  of  the  Egyptian  year.  The  Egyptian  day 
began  at  midnight,  and  lunar  cycles  using  Egyptian  days  should 
also  begin  at  midnight,  and  the  moon  when  at  her  third  quarter 
rises  at  midnight.  As  the  Macedonian  months  in  b.c.  238  began 
with  the  moon  at  her  third  quarter,  they  were  adapted  to  the 
vague  year  in  this  way,  and  we  may  conclude  that  they  were 
connected  with  a lunar  year  like  that  belonging  to  the  Apis 
cycle.  As  the  priests  had  resolved  to  change  their  year  to  one 
like  the  Julian,  they  must  necessarily  abandon  the  lunar  cycle 
adapted  to  the  vague  year,  and  take  up  with  one  suitable  for 
their  new  year.  This  will  be  some  kind  of  luni-solar  cycle ; and 
as  the  changes  were  made  to  keep  the  seasons  and  festivals  rela- 
tively to  the  same  dates,  this  luni-solar  cycle  must,  like  others 
observed  for  a like  purpose,  commence  with  the  moon  in  reference 
to  one  of  the  four  points  of  the  sun’s  place  in  the  ecliptic.  In 
b.c.  237  the  visible  new  moon  was  on  the  25th  of  January,  con- 
current with  the  9th  of  Khoiakh.  This  was  the  new  moon 
following  the  winter  solstice,  and  it  complies  with  the  conditions 
suitable  for  the  beginning  of  a luni-solar  cycle.  If  they  at  this 
time  advanced  the  1st  of  Dius  from  its  place  at  the  third  quarter 


32 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


of  the  moon  to  the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon  in  order  to 
observe  a cycle  of  this  kind,  the  1st  of  Dius,  beginning  it  now  at 
sunset,  will  concur  with  the  25th  and  26th  of  January  and  the 
9th  and  10th  of  Khoiakh.  The  form  of  the  luni-solar  cycle  will 
be  similar  in  construction  to  the  Sothic  cycle;  that  is,  it  will 
contain  thirty-three  lunar  years  of  twelve  months,  which  will 
be  intercalated  at  the  end  with  a lunar  year  of  twelve  months. 
This  cycle  will  begin  in  b.c.  237.  The  second  will  commence  in 
b.c.  204  on  the  12th  and  13th  of  Khoiakh.  The  ground  for  this 
is  that  four  hundred  and  eight  lunar  months  are  three  days, 
eleven  hours  plus  longer  than  thirty-three  vague  years.  These 
dates  are  further  affected  by  being  those  of  the  visible  new 
moon.  The  calculation  is  made  with  regard  to  the  vague  year, 
because  I propose  to  bring  the  cycle  down  to  b.c.  196  at  a time 
when  the  vague  dates  were  restored,  when  the  condition  was 
the  same  as  if  there  had  been  no  change  in  the  Egyptian  year. 
The  following  will  be  the  dates  of  the  1st  of  Dius  in  the  vague 
year  for  nine  years  of  the  second  cycle. 


B.C. 

204 

Year  of  Cycle. 

1 

1st  of  Dius 

= 12th-13tb  Khoiakh. 

203 

2 

U 

= lst-2d  Khoiakh.  (8-9  January.) 

203 

3 

u 

= 21st^22d  Athyr.  (29-30  Decem- 

202 

4 

n 

ber.) 

= 10th-llth  Athyr. 

201 

5 

u 

= 30th  Phaophi-lst 

200 

6 

u 

Athyr. 

= 19th-20th  Phaophi. 

199 

7 

a 

= 8th-9th  Phaophi. 

198 

8 

u 

= 28th-29th  Thoth. 

197 

9 

u 

= 17 tli-1 8th  Thoth. 

The 

ninth  lunar  year  will  begin  in  b.c.  197  on  the  17th-18th 

of  Thoth,  concurrent  with  the  24th-25th  of  October.  This  year 
must  not  be  confused  with  the  ninth  regnal  year  of  Epiphanes  cur- 
rent at  this  time,  which  by  the  canon  was  a vague  year.  With 
the  1st  of  Dius,  concurrent  with  the  17th-18th  of  Thoth,  in  b.c. 
197  the  4th  of  Xanthicus  will  in  b.c.  196  concur  with  the  18th- 
19th  of  Mechir,  in  perfect  agreement  with  the  Rosetta  stone. 
The  1st  of  Xanthicus  will  concur  with  the  15th-16th  of  Mechir, 
and  was  the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon.  It  is  impossible 


ADJUSTMENT  OP  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  33 

for  the  vague  year,  as  the  lunar  dates  fall  back  for  each  year 
at  the  rate  of  ten  days,  fifteen  hours  'plus , to  have  any  lunar 
date  on  the  15th  of  Mechir  suitable  for  the  use  of  lunar  months 
which  are  always  reckoned  from  the  phases  of  the  moon,  in 
any  other  year  but  b.c.  196,  for  some  years  before  and  after 
that  year.  This  certainly  was  the  case  in  b.c.  198.  I now  pro- 
pose to  compare  these  results  with  the  Apis  cycle. 

The  Apis  cycle,  it  is  well  known,  contained  nine  thousand  one 
hundred  and  twenty-five  days,  which  is  a period  longer  than 
three  hundred  and  nine  synodical  months  by  one  hour,  nine 
minutes,  and  seventeen  seconds.  If  a series  of  these  cycles  starts 
from  an  era,  the  lunar  dates  will  fall  back  in  the  cycle  at  the 
rate  of  one  hour,  nine  minutes,  and  seventeen  seconds.  If  the 
series  of  cycles  is  to  be  continued  with  the  same  lunar  dates, 
which  is  one  purpose  of  the  cycle,  a new  beginning  must  be 
made;  a new  era  established,  which  will  have  the  same  lunar 
dates  the  preceding  series  had  at  its  beginning.  Six  hundred 
vague  years  contain  one  day,  three  hours,  seven  minutes,  and 
seventeen  seconds  more  time  than  seven  thousand  four  hundred 
and  sixteen  synodical  months,  and  one  hundred  and  thirty-two 
synodical  months  contain  one  day,  three  hours,  fifty  minutes,  and 
twenty-nine  seconds  more  time  than  eleven  vague  years.  After 
six  hundred  and  eleven  years  the  lunar  dates  will  be  very  nearly 
the  same  in  the  vague  year  as  they  were  at  the  beginning  of 
this  period.  Six  hundred  and  eleven  vague  years  contain 
twenty-four  cycles  of  twenty-five  years,  and  eleven  supple- 
mental years.  The  cycles  after  beginning  regularly  every 
twenty-sixth  year,  counting  from  the  first  year  of  the  previous 
cycle,  for  twenty-four  times,  will,  after  the  completion  of  the 
twenty-fourth  cycle,  pass  over  a period  of  eleven  vague  years, 
when  another  series  will  commence ; or,  to  state  it  another  way, 
the  twenty-fourth  cycle  is  extended  to  thirty-six  years. 

Bach  cycle  of  twenty-five  years  is  begun  with  the  1st  of 
Thoth.  The  cycle  may  be  begun  with  any  month,  but  Thoth 
is  preferred  because  it  is  the  first  month  of  the  vague  year. 
The  cycle  also  begins  with  the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon 
on  the  1st  of  Thoth.  It  could  begin  with  full  moon  on  that 
date,  in  which  case  the  epoch  of  the  first  year  of  Cycle  I.  will 
be  seven  years  higher. 


34 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


Epoch  of  Series  I.  (611  years)  b.c.  1661. 

“ “ “ II.  ( “ ) “ 1050. 

“ “ “ III.  ( “ ) “ 440. 

These  epochs  are  separated  by  six  hundred  and  eleven  vague 
years.  The  epoch  of  Series  III.  is  one  year  higher  than  would 
be  the  case  if  the  interval  was  in  Julian  years.  During  the 
series  which  began  in  b.c.  440  the  Egyptian  year  underwent  a 
change,  and  its  effect  upon  the  vague  year  has  already  been  dis- 
cussed, but  its  influence  upon  the  Apis  cycle  is  now  to  be  dis- 
covered. If  the  vague  year  which  began  in  b.c.  236  and  came 
to  an  end  in  b.c.  235,  which  was  the  third  year  of  a series  of 
four  years  beginning  in  b.c.  238,  received  the  first  additional 
day  ordained  by  the  decree  of  Canopus,  it  would  be  a proper 
year,  because  Sirius  rose  on  the  1st  of  Payni,  b.c.  238.  Let  the 
time  of  the  heliacal  rising  be  put  exactly  at  6 a.m.  on  the  1st  of 
Payni;  this  was  not  the  case,  but  to  simplify  the  matter  we 
will  suppose  it  to  be  at  6 a.m.  The  sidereal  year  advances  in 
the  vague  six  hours  plus  for  each  year.  The  condition  for  the 
four  years  of  the  series  will  be  as  follows: 


B.C. 

238 

237 

236 

235 

234 


Year. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 


Sirius  rises  on  1st  of  Payni. 
6 A.M. 

12  noon. 

6 P.M. 

12  midnight. 

6 A.M. 


If  to  year  3,  which  came  to  an  end  in  b.c.  236,  an  additional 
day  was  added*  the  rising  of  the  star  will  be  thrown  back  to 
midnight  of  the  30th  of  Pachons  for  year  4,  and  year  5 will 
begin  a new  series  of  four  years,  with  the  star  rising  at  6 a.m. 
on  the  1st  of  Payni. 

Of  course,  the  same  will  be  true  if  in  place  of  6 a.m.  is  inserted 
the  true  time  of  the  rising  in  b.c.  238,  the  true  advance  in  four 
years  being  one  day,  thirty-six  minutes  plus.  I have  supposed 
the.  Egyptian  year  which  began  in  b.c.  197  to  have  had  the 
vague  dates  restored  in  order  to  produce  the  concurrent  dates 
Mechir  18  and  Xanthicus  4 in  b.c.  196.  The  year  which  began 
in  b.c.  236  ceased  to  be  vague  when  it  received  the  extra  day  at 
its  end  in  b.c.  235.  The  year  b.c.  197,  by  the  restoration  of 
the  vague  dates,  is  for  that  reason  the  first  vague  year  following 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  35 

the  vague  year  of  b.c.  237 ; it  takes  the  place  of  the  vague 
year  of  b.c.  236-235. 


B.C. 

Year. 

B.C. 

Year. 

240 

0-1 

201 

0-1 

239 

1-2 

200 

1-2 

238 

2-3 

199 

2-3 

237 

3-4 

198 

3-4 

236 

4-5 

197 

4-5 

235 

5 

196 

5 

In  this  table  the  cycle  has  been  extended  back  from  b.c.  197 
to  b.c.  201.  It  was  supposed  that  the  Apis  cjTcle  was  not  ob- 
served in  b.c.  201,  but  it  may  be  taken  to  be  the  epoch  of  the 
first  year  of  a new  series,  the  fifth  year  of  which  began  in 
b.c.  197. 

The  condition  of  the  new  series  is  that  the  1st  of  Thoth  con- 
curs in  b.c.  201  with  the  9th  of  October,  the  same  concurrence 
that  existed  in  b.c.  1661,  these  epochs  being  exactly  separated 
by  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  Julian  years,  or  fourteen  hundred 
and  sixty -one  vague  years  (a  Sothic  cycle).  Calculating  by  mean 
months  from  an  epoch,  the  following  lunar  dates  are  found  : 

b.c.  1661, 1st  of  Thoth.  Conjunction  of  Sun  and  Moon,  Oct.  9,  lOh.  8m.  p.m. 

“ 1050,  “ “ “ “ May  10,  lOh.  12m.  p.m. 

“ 440,  “ “ “ “ Dec.  8, 10h.35m.  p.m. 

“ 201,  “ “ “ “ Oct.  8,  7h.  llm.A.M. 

The  difference  between  the  new  series  is,  the  1st  of  Thoth  of 
Cycle  I.  (new  series)  is  the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon,  and  not 
that  of  the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon.  The  following  is 
a table  of  these  cycles  as  just  described  : 

Table  I.  of  Apis  Cycles. 


B.C.  1661  B.C.' 

1561  b.c.  1461 

b.c.  1361 

B.C. 

1261 

B.C.  1161 

b.c.  1061 

“ 1636  “ 

1536  “ 1436 

“ 1336 

u 

1236 

“ 1136 

(1061 

“ 1611  “ 

1511  “ 1411 

“ 1311 

u 

1211 

“ 1111 

11 

“ 1586  “ 

1486  “ 1386 

“ 1286 

u 

1186 

“ 1086 

1050) 

Series  II. 

b.c.  1050  b.c.  950  B.c.  850 

b.c.  750 

B.C. 

650 

b.c.  550  ] 

b.c.  450 

“ 1025 

“ 925  “ 825 

“ 725 

u 

625 

“ 526 

(451 

“ 1000 

“ 900  “ 800 

“ 700 

u 

600 

“ 501 

11 

“ 975 

“ 875  “ 775 

“ 675 

u 

575 

“ 476 

440) 

36 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOROGY. 


Series  III. 

b.c.  400  b.c.  340  b.c.  240 
“ 415  “ 315 

“ 390  “ 290 

“ 365  “ 265 

New  Series. 

B.C.  201  B.C.  101  B.C.  1 A.D.  100 

“ 176  “ 76  A.D.  25  “ 125 

“ 151  “ 51  “ 60  “ 150 

“ 126  “ 26  “ 75  “ 175 

The  purpose  so  far  has  been  to  show  that  the  adjustment  made 
upon  the  testimony  of  Timocharis  in  b.c.  272  was  still  applicable 
to  the  Egyptian  year  b.c.  196,  subject  to  the  advance  of  the 
Julian  year  in  the  vague.  Between  this  point  and  the  reforma- 
tion of  the  Egyptian  year  by  the  Emperor  Augustus  no  change 
was  made  in  the  vague  year. 

The  following  table  of  Apis  cycles  differs  from  the  previous 
one  in  that  they  are  reckoned  from  the  1st  of  Phamenoth,  the 
seventh  month, — that  is,  six  months  earlier, — to  carry  out  the 
idea  that  the  lunar  cycle  of  the  vague  year  began  with  the 
third  quarter  of  the  moon  on  the  1st  of  Phamenoth. 

Table  II.  of  Epochs  of  Apis  Cycles. 

b.c.  1661.  1st  of  Phamenoth  concurrent  with  April  7.  The  new  moon 
on  the  15th  of  April  concurrent  with  Phamenoth  9. 


B.C.  1661  B.C.  1561 

b.c.  1461 

b.c.  1361 

B.c.  1262 

b.c.  1162 

b.c.  1062 

“ 1636 

“ 1536 

“ 1436 

“ 1336 

“ 1237 

“ 1137 

(1062 

“ 1611 

“ 1511 

“ 1411 

“ 1311 

“ 1212 

“ 1112 

11 

“ 1586 

“ 1486 

“ 1386 

“ 1286 

“ 1187 

“ 1087 

1051) 

b.c.  1051. 

1st  of 

Phamenoth  equals  6th  of  November.  The 

new  moon 

on  the  14th  of  November  equals  9th  of  Phamenoth. 


b.c.  1051 

b.c.  951 

B.C. 

851 

b.c.  751 

B.C. 

651 

B.C. 

551 

b.c.  451 

“ 1026 

“ 926 

u 

826 

“ 726 

u 

626 

ti 

526 

(451 

“ 1001 

“ 901 

11 

801 

“ 701 

n 

601 

u 

501 

11 

“ 976 

“ 876 

u 

776 

“ 676 

u 

576 

u 

476 

440) 

b.c.  440.  1st  of  Phamenoth  equals  12th  of  May.  The  new  moon  on  the 
20th  of  May  equals  9th  of  Phamenoth. 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  37 

b.c.  201.  1st  of  Phamenoth  equals  7th  of  April.  The  new  moon  on  the 
13th  of  April  equals  7tli  of  Phamenoth. 


B.C. 

440 

b.c.  340  b.c.  240 

B.C. 

201 

B.C. 

101 

B.C. 

1 A.D. 

100 

a 

415 

“ 315 

tt 

176 

tt 

76 

A.D. 

25  “ 

125 

tt 

390 

“ 290 

tt 

151 

tt 

51 

tt 

50  “ 

150 

tt 

365 

“ 265 

a 

126 

a 

26 

tt 

75  “ 

175 

Julius  Caesar  began  the  reformed  Roman  year  with  the  1st  of 
January,  b.c.  45.  The  corresponding  date  in  the  Egyptian  year 
is  of  some  chronological  importance.  The  Canon  of  Ptolemy, 

or  the  astronomical  canon,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  reckoned 

■« 

its  years  from  the  1st  of  the  month  Thoth.  It  begins  with  the 
era  of  Nabonassar,  and  is  composed  of  four  sets  of  kings,  or 
rulers  of  four  nations, — the  Babylonian,  the  Persian,  the  Egypto- 
Greek  (the  Ptolemies),  and  the  Roman.  It  is  of  importance  to 
know  the  concurrent  dates  of  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year  at 
the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  former  by  the  Romans.  The 
existing  arrangement  between  the  two  years  causes  the  1st  of 
Thoth  to  fall  on  September  3,  b.c.  45.  This  date,  September  3, 
is  connected  with  the  date  July  20;  that  is,  this  adjustment 
makes  the  vague  1st  of  Thoth  fall  on  July  20  from  a.d.  136  to 
a.d.  140.  The  vague  1st  of  Thoth  must  not  be  confounded 
with  the  legal  1st  of  Thoth.  The  former  is  the  year  which  lost 
its  legal  existence  when  the  Romans  reformed  the  Egyptian  year 
and  made  it  substantially  the  same  as  the  Julian  by  the  addition 
of  a day  every  four  years.  The  1st  of  Thoth,  concurring  with 
July  20,  a.d.  136  to  a.d.  140,  is  the  vague,  not  the  legal,  1st  of 
Thoth.  For  it  appears  that  the  astronomers  continued  the  use 
of  the  vague  year  in  their  calculations.  The  date  July  20  refers 
to  the  heliacal  rising  of  Sirius. 

It  is  necessary,  if  it  is  possible  to  be  done,  that  the  history  of 
the  Roman  and  Egyptian  years  and  their  concurrent  dates 
should  be  presented  in  a light  consistent  with  the  historical  facts 
connected  with  them.  Chronologists  have  endeavored  to  do 
this.  I cannot  do  better  than  to  quote  what  Dean  Prideaux  has 
written  for  this  purpose,  as  the  extract  will  contain  the  main 
facts  of  the  history  of  the  two  yeai’s  from  b.c.  45  to  a.d.  8. 

“As  Octavianus  came  to  Alexandria  in  the  beginning  of 
August,  so  he  had  there  settled  all  the  affairs  of  Egypt  by  the 
end  of  it ; and  in  the  beginning  of  September  again  marched 

4 


38 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


thence,  to  return  by  the  way  of  Syria,  Lesser  Asia,  and  Greece, 
again  unto  Kome.  From  this  conquest  of  Egypt  began  the  era 
of  Actiac  victory,  by  which  the  Egyptians  afterwards  computed 
their  time  till  the  first  year  of  the  Emperor  Dioclesian,  a.d. 
284;  from  that,  what  was  before  called  the  era  of  the  Actiac  vic- 
tory was  afterwards  called  the  era  of  Dioclesian,  and  by  the 
Christians  of  those  parts  the  era  of  the  martyrs,  because  in  the 
reign  of  that  emperor  began  the  tenth  persecution,  in  which  a 
very  great  number  of  Christians  suffered  martyrdom  for  their 
holy  religion.  Although  this  era  had  its  name  from  the  Actiac 
victory,  yet  it  had  not  its  beginning  till  near  a full  year  after  it, — 
that  is,  from  the  time  that  Egypt  was  reduced;  for  the  day 
from  whence  it  commenced  was  the  29th  of  August.  And 
therefore,  that  was  ever  after  the  first  day  of  the  year,  through 
all  the  years  by  which  these  eras — that  is,  the  era  of  the  Diocle- 
sian, or  the  martyrs,  as  well  as  that  of  the  Actiac  victory — did 
calculate  the  times  through  which  they  were  used.  The  reason 
which  fixed  the  beginning  of  this  era,  and  of  all  the  years  in  it, 
to  the  29th  of  August  was,  say  some,  because  on  that  day  Cleo- 
patra died ; and  the  Macedonian  empire  in  that  country  thereby 
ending,  the  Roman  began ; but  this  is  only  a modern  conjecture, 
for  none  of  the  ancients  say  it.  All  that  we  can  learn  from 
them  is  that  she  died  about  the  end  of  that  month,  but  none  of 
them  tell  us  on  what  day  it  happened.  The  true  reason  of  fix- 
ing it  at  this  day  was  because  this  was  then  the  first  day  of 
their  month  Thoth,  which  was  always  the  New-Year’s  day  of 
the  Egyptians,  from  whence  they  began  all  their  annual  calcula- 
tions; and  therefore  it  was  thought  the  properest  time  from 
whence  to  begin  all  the  alterations  in  their  era,  and  their  year, 
which  the  Romans,  on  the  conquest  of  their  countiy,  made  in 
both ; and  that  especially  since  the  time  of  that  conquest  fell  in 
therewith.  For  at  that  time  the  form  of  their  years,  as  well  as 
the  era  by  which  they  calculated  them,  was  changed  by  the 
order  of  the  conqueror.  The  old  era,  which  was  till  now  in  use 
among  them,  was  the  Philippic,  which  commenced  from  the 
death  of  Alexander,  and  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Philippus 
Aridseus,  his  successor;  and  the  form  of  their  year  was  the 
same  with  the  Nabonassarsean,  made  use  of  by  the  Chaldeans, 
which  consisted  of  twelve  months  of  thirty  days  each,  and  five 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  39 

additional  days  subjoined  to  them ; that  is,  it  consisted  in  the 
whole  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days,  without  a leap-year, 
the  want  whereof  made  this  year  to  he  a movable  year,  which 
after  every  four  years  began  a day  sooner  than  it  did  in  the 
four  years  immediately  preceding;  so  that,  in  the  space  of  one 
thousand  four  hundred  and  sixty  years,  this  form  carried  back 
the  beginning  of  the  year  through  all  the  different  seasons  of 
summer,  spring,  winter,  and  autumn,  till  it  brought  it  about 
again  to  the  same  point  of  time,  with  the  loss  of  one  whole  year 
in  the  cycle.  For  the  remedjfing  hereof,  the  Eomans,  on  their 
subduing  this  country,  made  a leap-year  in  the  Egyptian  calen- 
dar in  the  like  manner  as  in  the  Julian,  by  adding,  at  the  end  of 
every  fourth  year,  one  day  more  than  had  been  in  the  other 
three.  For,  whereas  the  other  three  had  only  five  days  super- 
added  at  the  end  of  each  of  them,  the  leap-year  had  six ; that  is,  it 
consisted  of  twelve  months  of  thirty  days  each,  and  six  additional 
days  subjoined  to  them  ; whereas  all  the  other  years  that  were 
not  leap-years  had  the  same  number  of  like  months,  and  only 
five  of  those  days  added  after  them.  And  hereby  the  Egyptian 
year  was  made  to  consist  exactly  in  the  same  number  of  days 
as  the  Julian,  though  not  exactly  in  the  same  form. 

“ For,  in  all  other  particulars,  the  old  form  of  the  Egyptian  year 
was  retained,  after  this  reformation,  in  the  same  manner  as  before. 
And  the  1st  of  Thoth,  which  was  always  the  first  day  of  the 
Egyptian  year,  falling  on  the  29th  of  August,  and  about  the 
same  time  when  the  Eomans,  on  their  conquest  of  Egypt,  ordered 
this  reformation,  this  induced  them  that  they  fixed  the  beginning 
of  the  new  year  where  they  found  the  beginning  of  the  old ; and 
the  29th  of  August  ever  after  continued  to  bo  the  first  day  of 
the  Egyptian  year,  as  long  as  the  empire  of  the  Eomans  con- 
tinued in  that  country,  and  from  thence  also — that  is,  from  the 
29th  of  August  of  this  year — the  new  Egyptian  era  of  the 
Actiac  victory,  as  well  as  their  new  reformed  year,  for  the  same 
reason,  had  its  commencement.  But  against  this  it  is  objected 
that  in  this  year  the  1st  of  Thoth  did  not  fall  on  the  29th  of 
August,  but  on  the  31st  of  that  month,  and  therefore  this  cannot 
be  the  reason  why  the  beginning  of  the  Egyptian  era  of  the 
Actiac  victory,  or  the  beginning  of  the  year  thenceforth  used  in 
that  country,  was  fixed  to  that  day.  And  it  must  thus  far  be 


40 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


acknowledged  that,  according  to  the  exact  calculation  of  the 
time,  this  objection  is  true.  For,  according  to  that,  the  1st  of 
Thoth  fell  this  year  in  the  Roman  calendar  on  the  31st,  and  not 
on  the  29th  of  August ; but  the  Romans  then  used  the  form-  of 
the  Julian  year  erroneously,  whereby  it  came  to  pass  that  the 
same  day  which  was  the  31st  of  August  in  their  true  calendar 
was  the  29th  in  their  erroneous  calendar,  which  error  proceeded 
from  hence,  that,  after  the  death  of  Julius  Csesar,  the  pontifices 
at  Rome  (as  hath  been  above  mentioned),  mistaking  the  time 
of  the  intercalation,  made  every  third  year  to  be  the  leap-year, 
instead  of  every  fourth ; by  which  error  six  hours  were  added 
every  third  year  more  than  should  be,  which  in  the  sixteen  years 
that  intervened  from  the  first  use  of  that  form  to  this  year, 
amounting  to  a day  and  a quarter,  this  erroneous  addition  had 
then  protruded  the  29th  of  August  in  the  erroneous  calendar 
into  the  place  of  the  31st  of  August  in  the  true  calendar,  and 
according  to  this  erroneous  calendar  the  Romans  then  computed, 
and  so  continued  to  do  for  thirty-six  years  after  the  first  forming 
of  this  year  by  Julius  Csesar,  till  at  length  Augustus,  on  the  dis- 
covery of  this  error,  took  care  that,  by  making  no  leap-year  for 
twelve  years  together,  all  the  time  that  was  erroneously  added 
was  again  left  out,  whereby  the  protruded  days  in  the  erroneous 
calendar  were  all  brought  back  again  to  their  proper  places, 
where  they  ought  to  have  been  according  to  the  true  calendar. 
But  the  protrusion  of  the  day  making  no  alteration  in  its  number 
or  name,  hence  it  came  to  be  said  that  it  was  the  29th  of  August, 
whereas,  truly,  it  was  the  31st  of  that  month,  from  whence  this 
Egyptian  era  of  the  Actiac  victory,  and  all  the  years  by  which 
it  computed,  had  their  beginning.  This  era  truly  had  its  begin- 
ning from  the  conquest  of  Egypt,  and  therefore  ought  to  have 
been  called  the  era  of  the  Alexandrian  victory,  whereby  that 
country  was  reduced  under  the  Roman  yoke.  But  the  Egyptians, 
to  avoid  the  disgrace  of  thus  owning  this  conquest,  rather  chose 
to  call  it  the  era  of  the  Actiac  victory,  though  that  was  gained 
one  whole  year  before;  and  since  this  era  was  only  used  in 
Egypt,  they  had  there  it  in  their  full  power  to  call  it  by  what 
name  they  pleased.”* 


*Prideaux’s  “ Connection,”  An.  30. 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  41 

Dean  Prideaux  has  utterly  failed  to  explain  the  corresponding 
dates  between  the  Julian  and  the  Egyptian  year  at  this  time. 
Ho,  in  accounting  for  the  1st  of  Thoth  falling  on  the  29th  of 
August,  b.c.  30,  erred  in  the  method  of  his  calculation.  He  cal- 
culated the  intercalations  as  at  six  hours  every  year.  The 
intercalations  he  well  knew  were  added  only  one  day  at  a time, 
yet  ho  says  the  error  of  the  erroneous  intercalations  in  sixteen 
years  was  one  day  and  a quarter,  and  this  was  the  reason  August 
29  occupied  the  place  of  August  31.  The  correct  reason  was 
that,  as  the  period  is  sixteen  years,  and  the  first  year  b.c.  45  was 
intercalated,  and  every  third  year  thereafter,  the  sixteenth  year 
being  one  of  these,  six  days  had  been  added  in  this  way  against 
the  four  days  required  by  the  correct  intercalations,  and  thereby 
August  29  had  been  advanced  two  days  to  the  place  of  August 
31.  But  his  most  unfortunate  mistake  is  the  explanation  of  the 
corresponding  dates  of  the  1st  of  Thoth  and  the  29th  of  August. 
If,  at  the  time  of  the  subjugation  of  Egypt,  Augustus  reformed 
the  Egyptian  year  and  established  its  beginning  to  be  the  1st  of 
Thoth,  corresponding  to  the  29th  of  August,  what  explanation 
is  to  be  given  of  the  correspondence  between  the  two  for  the 
next  twenty  years,  and  also  after  the  three  intercalary  days,  which 
were  left  out  of  the  twelve  years,  were  omitted?  For  if  the  1st 
of  Thoth  was  at  the  29th  of  August,  b.c.  30,  and  also  the  Egyp- 
tian year  at  that  time  began  to  receive  an  intercalary  day  every 
four  years,  while  the  Eoman  was  receiving  one  every  three  years, 
then  in  the  twenty  years  following  b.c.  30  the  erroneous  inter- 
calations of  the  Eoman  year  will  exceed  the  correct  ones  of  the 
Egyptian  year  by  one  day,  and  at  the  end  when  they  ceased  the 
1st  of  Thoth  will  have  fallen  back  one  day  to  August  28.  From 
this  place,  by  the  omission  of  the  next  three  intercalary  days 
from  the  Eoman  year,  the  1st  of  Thoth  will  advance  to  the  31st 
of  August,  its  correct  place,  according  to  Prideaux,  at  b.c.  30. 
Following  the  explanation  given  by  Prideaux,  it  was  absolutely 
impossible  for  the  1st  of  Thoth  to  fall  on  August  29  after  the 
erroneous  intercalations  had  been  corrected.  It  was  an  actual 
fact,  and  not  an  assumed  one,  that  the  1st  of  Thoth  fell  on  the 
29th  of  August  during  the  Eoman  dominion. 

If  we  were  tied  down  to  a particular  of  this  view  by  any  his- 
torical fact,  such  as,  that  in  the  year  b.c.  30,  Augustus  reformed 

4* 


42 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


the  Egyptian  year,  it  would  be  set  down  as  a blunder  on  his 
part  if  he  had  expected  to  accomplish  the  result  he  aimed  at  by 
the  method  which  Dean  Prideaux  describes.  But  there  is  no 
such  historical  fact.  Other  writers  place  the  reformation  of 
the  Egyptian  year  in  b.c.  24,  connecting  that  event  with  the 
twentieth  year  of  Augustus,  when,  according  to  what  would 
have  been  the  correct  intercalation  of  the  Julian,  the  1st  of 
Thoth  would  fall  on  the  29th  of  August.  These  reckon  Augustus’s 
first  year  from  b.c.  43.  This  view,  while  it  retains  the  era  of 
Actium,  begins  that  ei*a  with  a correspondence  between  the  Roman 
and  the  Egyptian  year  which  ought  to  have  come  about  some 
six  years  later,  but  which  did  not  because  of  the  irregular  inter- 
calations. Again,  the  Augustan  era,  which  by  some  is  held  to 
be  the  same  as  that  of  Actium,  is  by  others  made  to  begin 
in  B.c.  27,  as  the  year  in  which  he  first  received  the  name 
of  Augustus.  This  will  give  for  the  twentieth  year  of  the  em- 
peror b.c.  9,  which  was  the  last  year  incorrectly  intercalated. 
Augustus,  like  Julius  Csesar,  did  not  attempt  to  reform  the 
Roman  year  until  he  became  Pontifex  Maximus,  the  supervision 
of  the  calendar  belonging  to  his  office  as  chief  priest.  It  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  the  reformation  of  the  Egyptian  year 
took  place  at  about  the  same  time.  Augustus  became  Pontifex 
Maximus,  according  to  chronologers,  in  b.c.  14  or  b.c.  13.  The 
usual  chronology  requires  the  1st  of  Thoth  to  be  on  the  3d 
of  September,  b.c.  45.  It  is  upon  this  adjustment  of  the  vague 
year  to  the  Julian  that  Dean  Prideaux  and  other  chronologers 
base  their  explanations  of  the  legal  date  of  the  1st  of  Thoth  in 
the  Julian  year.  Not  one  of  these  accounts  for  the  historical 
facts  connected  with  the  two  years,  because  it  is  impossible  to 
do  so  on  the  basis  that  in  b.c.  45  the  1st  of  Thoth  corresponded 
with  September  3.  I propose  to  do  this  by  making  the  con- 
current dates  of  b.c.  45  the  1st  of  Thoth  and  the  7th  of  Sep- 
tember. To  obtain  this  arrangement  I begin  the  Julian  year  on 
the  25th  of  December  of  b.c.  46,  and  bring  down  to  this  point 
the  adjustment  of  the  Julian  and  vague  year  produced  by  the 
observation  of  Timocharis  in  b.c.  272. 

In  b.c.  272,  as  already  explained,  the  17th  of  Mesori  fell  on 
the  8th  of  October.  This  will  cause  the  1st  of  Thoth  in  this 
year  to  equal  the  27th  of  October.  But  if  the  beginning  of  the 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  43 

1st  of  January,  b.c.  45,  is  put  back  seven  days  to  December  25, 
the  correspondence  in  b.c.  272  must,  as  to  the  date  of  Julian, 
be  put  forward  seven  days  to  November  3.  The  precession  of 
the  Julian  in  the  vague  from  b.c.  272  to  any  date  in  the  vague 
year  corresponding  to  a date  in  the  Julian  following  the  1st  of 
March,  b.c.  45,  is  fifty-seven  days,  which  will  throw  back  the 
1st  of  Thoth  that  many  days,  so  that  in  this  year  its  corre- 
sponding date  will  be  September  7.  I have  already  gone  over 
the  first  step  in  this  argument, — that  is,  the  effect  the  observa- 
tion of  Timocharis  has  upon  the  concurrent  dates  of  the  Julian 
and  the  Egyptian  years.  It  now  remains  to  discover  if  there 
are  any  grounds  for  this  correction  of  the  beginning  of  the 
Julian  year  by  putting  it  back  seven  days,  and  then  to  apply 
the  effect  of  the  new  arrangement  to  the  concurrent  dates  under 
consideration. 

The  article  “ Calendar  (Roman)”  in  Smith’s  “ Greek  and 
Roman  Antiquities”  contains  the  following:  “It  was  probably 
the  original  intention  of  Caesar  to  commence  the  year  with  the 
shortest  day.  The  winter  solstice  at  Rome,  in  the  year  b.c.  46, 
occurred  on  the  24th  of  December  of  tbe  Julian  calendar.  His 
motive  for  delaying  the  commencement  for  seven  days  longer, 
instead  of  taking  the  following  day,  was  probably  the  desire  to 
gratify  the  superstition  of  the  Romans,  by  causing  the  first  year 
of  the  reformed  calendar  to  fall  on  the  day  of  the  new  moon. 
Accordingly,  it  is  found  that  the  mean  new  moon  occurred  at 
Rome  on  the  1st  of  January,  b.c.  45,  at  6h.  16'  p.m.  In  this 
Avay  alone  can  be  explained  the  phrase  used  by  Macrobius, 

1 Annum  civilem  Ccesar , habitis  ad  lunam  dimensionibus  constitutum, 
edicto  palam  proposito  publicavit.’  This  edict  is  also  mentioned 
by  Plutarch  where  he  gives  the  anecdote  of  Cicero,  who,  on 
being  told  by  some  one  that  the  constellation  Lyra  would  rise 
the  next  morning,  observed,  ‘ Yes,  no  doubt,  in  obedience  to  the 
edict.’  ” Macrobius  does  not  say  that  the  1st  of  January  began 
on  the  day  of  the  new  moon,  but  he  means  that  the  epoch  of 
the  year  established  by  Julius  Caesar  began  adjusted  to  the  moon. 
This  is  not  necessarily  the  new  moon.  The  Roman  civil  day 
began  at  midnight.  In  beginning  the  epoch  adjusted  to  the 
moon,  the  civil  day  should  begin  with  the  moon  in  some  relation 
to  its  beginning.  The  Jews,  for  instance,  as  will  be  more  fully 


44 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


set  forth  in  the  second  part  of  this  work,  began  their  epoch  and 
day  with  the  full  moon, — that  is,  at  sunset.  In  the  case  of  the 
Romans,  as  the  moon  is  to  be  visible  to  have  any  clearly-marked 
relation  to  midnight,  the  beginning  of  the  civil  day,  it  should  be 
either  rising  or  setting  or  on  the  meridian  at  that  time.  Now, 
if  it  is  known  by  a calculation  that  the  new  moon  was  a little 
after  six  o’clock  p.m.  on  the  1st  of  January,  it  follows  that  on 
December  25  the  moon  was  at  her  third  quarter  and  rose  at 
midnight,  the  beginning  of  the  civil  day.  We  have  here  just 
what  Macrobius  describes,  and  which  is  wanting  if  the  epoch 
began  with  the  new  moon,  at  6h.  16'  p.m.  on  the  1st  of  January. 
In  ordinary  dates  it  is  sufficient  for  the  moon  to  fall  at  any 
time  in  the  same  day,  but  an  era  should  have  the  astronom- 
ical phenomena — which  are  possible  under  the  system  of  time- 
measurement  employed — at  the  beginning.  As  to  the  beginning 
on  the  day  of  the  new  moon  to  gratify  the  superstitious  notions 
of  the  Romans,  if  this  was  not  done,  then  the  prevalence  of  such 
a superstition  may  perhaps  explain  why  the  priests  misunder- 
stood the  rules  laid  down  by  Caesar  for  the  future  regulation  of 
the  year,  their  neglect  being  wilful  and  not  through  ignorance. 
Nobody  can  understand  why  Cicero  should  speak  in  so  sarcastic 
a manner  about  beginning  the  year  with  the  day  of  the  new 
moon,  if  Julius  Caesar  made  that  commencement  to  gratify  the 
superstitious  notions  of  the  Romans.  That  only  means  they 
were  accustomed,  when  they  employed  lunar  months,  to  begin 
them  with  the  new  moon,  and,  after  the  abandonment  of  a year 
strictly  lunar,  to  commence  their  technical  epoch  in  the  same 
way;  any  change  in  this  respect  would  be  unpopular.  But  if 
we  understand  the  edict  referred  to  the  beginning  of  the  year 
on  the  25th  of  December,  we  may  be  able  to  comprehend  Cicero 
as  if  he  mistook  the  language  of  the  edict  in  exactly  the  same 
way  as  the  words  of  Macrobius  have  been  misunderstood. 

The  effect  of  beginning  the  1st  ot'  January  on  the  25th  of 
December  would  be,  as  I have  shown,  to  cause  the  1st  of  Thoth 
to  correspond  with  the  7th  of  September,  b.c.  45. 

In  the  following  table  I have  set  forth  and  contrasted  the 
two  places  of  the  1st  of  Thoth  in  the  Julian  year.  It  shows 
the  incorrect  intercalations,  and  what  should  be  the  correct  ones. 
The  table  extends  from  b.c.  45  to  a.d.  8,  inclusive.  In  b.c.  9 I 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  45 


have  begun  the  legal  1st  of  Thoth  corresponding  by  the  incorrect 
intercalation  to  August  26,  but  by  the  correct,  to  what  should 
have  been  the  29th  of  August. 


Dates  of  1st  of  Thoth  in  the  Julian  between  B.C.  J/j  and  A.D.  8. 


According  to  thf.  Adjustment  that  in  b.c. 
45  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  the  Vague  Year 

CONCURRED  WITH  THE  3d  OF  SErTEMREU. 


45 

44 

43 

42 

41 

40 

39 

38 

37 

36 

35 

34 

33 

32 

31 

30 

29 

28 

27 

26 

25 

24 

23 

22 

21 

20 

19 

18 

17 

16 

15 

14 

13 

12 

11 

10 

9 


H etf 
© <u 


B. 


Date  of  iBt  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
correct  in- 
tercalation. 


September  3. 


September  2. 


September  1. 


August  31. 


August  30. 


August  29. 


August  28. 

August  27. 


August  26. 

August  25. 


August  25. 


Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
incorrect 
intercala- 
tion. 


September  3. 


September  2. 
September  1. 


August  31. 
August  30. 


August  29. 


August  28. 
August  27. 


August  26. 
August  25. 


August  24. 
August  23. 
August  22. 


(Omitted.) 
1st  Thoth  = 
23d. 


According  to  the  Adjustment  that  in  b.c.  45 
the  1st  of  Tiiotii  of  the  Vague  Year  con- 
curred WITH  THE  7th  OF  SEPTEMBER. 


Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
correct  in- 
tercalation. 


September  7. 


September  6. 


Septembers. 


September!. 


September  3. 


September  2. 


September  1. 


August  31. 


August  30. 

August  29. 


August  29. 


Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
incorrect 
intercala- 
tion. 


September  7. 
September  6. 


Septembers. 

September!. 


September  3. 
September  2. 


September  1. 
August  31. 


August  30. 
August  29. 


August  28. 
August  27. 
August  26. 


(Omitted.) 


Battle  of  Ac- 
tium. 


Intercalations 
commenced 
in  the  Egyp- 
tian Year. 


Thoth  1 ad- 
vances to  the 
27th  of  August. 


46 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


Dates  of  1st  of  Thoth  in  the  Julian  between  B.C.  J5  and  A.D.  S 
(Continued). 


According  to  tiie  Adjustment  that  in  b.c. 

According  to 

the  Adjustment  that  in  b.c.  45 

45  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  the  Vague  Year 

the  1st  of 

Thoth  of  the  Vague  Year  con- 

concurred  with  the  3d  of  September. 

CURRED  WITH  THE  ITU  OF  SEPTEMBER. 

Julian  Year. 

Bissextile 

Year. 

Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
correct  in- 
tercalation. 

Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
incorrect 
intercala- 
tion. 

Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
correct  in- 
tercalation. 

Date  of  1st  of 
Thoth  ac- 
cording to 
incorrect 
intercala- 
tion. 

2 

1 

B. 

August  25. 

(Omitted.) 

August  29. 

(Omitted.) 

Thoth  1 ad- 

1st  Thoth  = 

vances  to  the 

25th. 

28th  of  August. 

A.D. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

B. 

August  25. 

(Omitted.) 

August  29. 

(Omitted.) 

Thoth  1 ad- 

1st  Thoth  = 

vances  to  the 

5 

24th. 

29th  of  August. 

7 

8 

B. 

August  25. 

August  25. 

August  29. 

August  29. 

The  two  historical  facts  to  be  conformed  to  are  the  date  of 
the  battle  of  Actium,  which,  according  to  Dion  Cassius,  was  the 
2d  of  September,  the  fourth  of  the  nones  of  September,  and  the 
legal  1st  of  Thoth,  falling  normally  on  the  29th  of  August.  By 
inspection  of  the  foregoing  table,  it  will  be  found  that,  according 
to  the  adjustment  that  b.c.  45,  1st  of  Thoth,  concurred  with  Sep- 
tember 7,  the  vague  1st  of  Thoth  fell  on  the  2d  of  September, 
b.c.  30,  and  this,  by  the  real  but  incorrect  intercalation,  showing 
that  if  the  battle  of  Actium  was  fought  in  the  year  b.c.  30,  it 
was  truty  fought  on  the  1st  of  Thoth. 

The  table  in  this  connection  shows  that  in  B.c.  9,  the  last 
year  which  was  incorrectly  intercalated,  and  which  completed 
the  error  which  Augustus  at  that  time  proposed  to  correct,  the 
1st  of  Thoth  fell  on  the  26th  of  August  by  the  incorrect  inter- 
calation ; the  correct  would  have  made  the  corresponding  term 
of  the  Julian  to  be  August  29.  From  this  point  on  for  twelve 
years  the  Julian  does  not  receive  any  intercalation,  three  such 
days  being  omitted.  At  the  time  of  the  Augustan  reformation 
began  that  of  the  Egyptian  year;  in  other  words,  when  the 


ADJUSTMENT  OF  THE  EGYPTIAN  YEAR  TO  THE  JULIAN.  47 

intercalations  stopped  in  the  Eoman  year  they  began  in  the 
Egyptian,  and  were  added  in  those  years  in  which  those  of  the 
Eoman  should  have  been  added  were  it  not  necessary  to  omit 
them  for  the  purpose  of  correcting  the  error  into  which  that 
time-measure  had  fallen.  These  were  the  years  b.c.  5 and  1 
and  a.d.  4.  By  this  means  the  Julian  became  a vague  year 
for  the  time  being,  and  the  Egyptian,  having  the  true  character 
of  the  Julian,  advanced  in  the  latter  three  days,  from  the  26th 
of  August  to  the  29th  of  the  same  month,  and  then  stopped, 
because  when  the  next  bissextile  year  came  round,  the  twelve 
years  having  expired,  both  years  received  intercalations  in  that 
same  year,  and  continued  to  receive  them  in  the  same  years, 
the  1st  of  Thoth  ever  afterwards,  during  the  Eoman  dominion 
in  Egypt,  falling  on  the  29th  of  August. 

Some  chronologists  place  the  battle  of  Actium  as  happening 
in  B.c.  31.  But  this  is  contrary  to  the  astronomical  canon, 
which  they  profess  to  follow,  but  do  not  hesitate  to  depart  from 
to  the  difference  of  a year  or  two,  if  they  think  it  necessary. 
According  to  the  canon,  Cleopatra  began  to  reign  in  b.c.  52,  and 
she  reigned  twenty-two  full  years ; therefore  her  last  full  year 
began  in  B.c.  31  and  ended  in  b.c.  30.  A writer  on  the  canon 
says,  “It  is  proved  beyond  all  doubt  that  the  principle  on  which 
the  length  of  reign  of  the  Eoman  emperors  is  assigned  is  the 
following:  The  epoch  of  each  reign  is  the  1st  of  Thoth  immedi- 
ately preceding  the  proclamation,  even  if  the  date  of  the  proc- 
lamation lies  towards  the  end  of  the  year.”*  This  being  the 
case,  Augustus’s  first  year,  which  began  in  b.c.  30,  includes  all 
that  portion  of  Cleopatra’s  reign  which  exceeded  the  full 
twenty-two  years  given  her  in  the  canon. 

If  the  battle  of  Actium  was  fought  in  b.c.  31,  then,  as  Cleo- 
patra’s full  years  did  not  terminate  until  the  1st  of  Thoth  in 
b.c.  30,  which  according  to  the  usual  adjustment  of  the  Eoman 
and  Egyptian  years,  by  the  incori’ect  intercalation,  corresponded 
at  that  time  to  August  29,  and  as  Cleopatra  died  in  the  same 
month,  and  the  final  subjugation  also  took  place  in  it,  it  follows 
that  by  the  principle  of  the  canon  Augustus  should  claim  as  his 
own  all  that  last  year  of  the  Egyptian  queen,  because  he  surely 


* “ Ordo  Sceclorum,”  $ 437. 


48  EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 

became  master  of  Egypt  before  its  close.  All  trouble  is  avoided 
by  placing  the  battle  of  Actium  in  b.c.  30.  If  it  was  fought  on 
September  2,  which  by  my  arrangement  of  these  years  corre- 
sponded to  the  1st  of  Tboth,  b.c.  30,  and  if  the  final  subjugation 
of  Egypt  was  finished  in  August  of  the  following  Julian  year, 
then,  as  the  vague  year  began  and  ended  in  September,  both 
the  battle  of  Actium  and  final  subjugation  fell  in  with  the  same 
vague  year;  that  is,  the  one  which  began  in  b.c.  30  and  ended 
in  September,  b.c.  29.  It  makes  no  difference  whether  Augus- 
tus’s reign  is  reckoned  from  the  death  of  Cleopatra,  the  final 
subjugation  of  Egypt,  or  the  battle  of  Actium,  because  these 
events  all  happened  in  the  same  vague  year,  which  is  reckoned 
by  the  rule  of  the  canon  as  his  first  year. 

From  a review  of  the  whole  subject,  the  adjustment  of  the 
Egyptian  vague  year  to  the  Julian,  it  is  clear  the  observation 
made  by  Timocharis  in  b.c.  272  was  a very  important  one. 


CHAPTER  III. 

SOTHIC  AND  PIICENIX  CYCLES. 

The  tradition  of  the  Sothic  cycle,  called  by  the  Latins  “ Canic- 
ular,” is,  it  equalled  in  length  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty 
Julian  years,  and  recognized  the  retention  of  the  vague  because 
fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-one  vague  years  contain  the  same 
number  of  days  as  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  Julian.  The 
fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-first  vague  year  is  technically  inter- 
calary and  uncounted,  and  the  period  is  put  at  fourteen  hun- 
dred and  sixty  yeai’s,  while  practically  its  length  was  fourteen 
hundred  and  sixty-one  vague  years.  These  fourteen  hundred 
and  sixty-one  vague  years  were  taken  to  be  equal  to  fourteen 
hundred  and  sixty  sidereal  years,  and  according  to  tbe  accounts 
the  supposition  was,  if  the  1st  of  Thoth  began  with  the  heliacal 
rising  of  Sirius,  the  Dog-star,  then  after  four  years  Sirius  would 
rise  again,  in  the  same  manner,  on  the  2d  of  Tboth,  and  so  on 
through  the  year,  rising  one  day  later  in  the  vague  every  four 


SOTHIC  AND  PHCENIX  CYCLES. 


49 


years.  In  this  way  it  would  take  the  star  fourteen  hundred  and 
sixty  years  to  rise  in  succession  on  all  the  days  of  the  vague 
year.  The  advance  of  the  sidereal  was  supposed  to  be  the  same 
as  the  falling  back  of  the  1st  of  Thoth  in  the  Julian,  it  moving 
backward  through  this  year  one  day  for  every  four  years.  The 
sidereal  year  (the  time  it  takes  the  sun  to  move  from  a fixed  star 
and  return  to  the  same  again)  is  longer  than  the  Julian,  and 
will  gain  a clear  day  over  it  in  one  hundred  and  sixty  years,  so 
that,  in  this  sense  of  the  sidereal  year,  the  cycle  could  not  be 
strictly  followed,  or,  at  least,  the  tradition  must  be  modified  in 
some  way  for  it  to  accomplish  its  end.  If  it  followed  the 
usual  rule,  the  moon  should  enter  as  a factor  for  its  deter- 
mination. 

Censorinus  says  that  this  was  not  the  case.  Writing  a.d.  238, 
his  words  are,  “ Ad  JEgyptiorum  vero  magnum  annum  luna  non 
pertinet,”  etc.  “In  the  great  year  of  the  Egyptians  which  the 
Greeks  call  the  Cynic,  and  we  in  Latin  the  Canicular,  the  moon 
is  not  taken  into  consideration,  inasmuch  as  its  commencement 
is  fixed  when  Canicular  rises  upon  the  day  of  that  month  which 
the  Egyptians  call  Thoth.”* 

Censorinus  means  either  that  it  is  impossible  to  take  the 
moon  into  consideration,  the  period  not  being  lunar,  or  that  the 
description  of  the  cycle  makes  no  mention  of  such  a fact.  In 
the  latter  case  the  omission  is  not  conclusive  either  way.  The 
moon  was  universally  taken  into  account  in  forming  cycles.  As 
to  the  period  not  being  lunar,  whether  it  is,  or  is  not,  is  not  at 
issue,  but  the  point  is,  Is  the  period  near  enough  lunar  to  be 
mistaken  for  such  ? I find  that  18,058  mean  synodical  months 
contain  533,263  days,  9 hours,  and  34  minutes  plus;  and  19,518 
sidereal  months  have  533,264  days,  4 hours,  and  14  minutes 
plus ; and  1461  vague  years  are  equal  to  533,265  days. 

If  the  knowledge  of  the  Egyptians  at  the  time  of  the  decree 
of  Canopus,  b.c.  238,  was  deficient  as  to  the  true  length  of  the 
sidereal  year,  it  is  also  probable  they  were  also  inaccurate  in  the 
measurement  of  the  lunar  month.  I do  not  mean,  in  this  last 
case,  that  their  ignorance  was  grossly  so.  If  the  mean  lunar 
month  is  made  but  three  seconds  longer  than  it  is,  it  will  have 


* Cory’s  “Fragments.” 
5 


50 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


an  excess  of  over  fifteen  hours  in  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty 
years,  which  is  more  than  enough  to  account  for  a belief  that  a 
lunar  period  concurred  with  a Sothic  cycle.  I hope  to  be  able, 
shortly,  to  show  the  reasonableness  of  the  hypothesis  that 
originally  the  sidereal  cycle  was  not  of  the  length  of  fourteen 
hundred  and  sixty-one  vague  years,  but  was  a period  which 
could  be  measured  by  lunar  and  sidereal  months,  which  is  very 
nearly  true  of  the  Sothic,  as  is  shown  by  the  figures  just  given, 
and  the  failure  in  its  case  being  the  origin  of  the  mistake,  that 
the  moon  did  not  enter  into  the  cycle. 

I offer  the  following  as  the  true  Sothic  cycle.  The  Sothic 
cycle,  as  the  Annus  Magnus,  or  Great  Year,  may  be  divided  into 
three  Great  Seasons,  in  analogy  with  the  three  seasons  of  the 
common  Egyptian  year.  For  technical  reasons  these  seasons 
are  not  all  of  the  same  length.  Season  I.  is  of  five  hundred  and 
forty  years,  in  which  time  the  rising  of  the  star  advances  four 
months  and  fifteen  days.  Season  II.  is  also  of  five  hundred  and 
forty  years,  in  which  the  advance  of  the  star  is  from  the  16th  of 
the  month  Tybi  four  months  and  fifteen  days.  Season  III.  is 
of  only  three  hundred  and  eighty  years,  in  which  time  the  star 
advances  three  months  and  the  five  intercalary  days,  and  com- 
pletes the  circuit  of  the  vague  year: 

Season  I.  = 540  vague  years  -{-  135  days. 

Season  II.  = 540  “ “ -j-  135  “ 

Season  III.  ==  380  “ “ + 95  “ 

1460  “ “ + 365  “ 

Season  I.  = 7219  sidereal  months  minus  0 day,  1 hour,  40  minutes  -)- 

Season  II.  = 7219  “ “ minus  0 “ 1 “ *40  “ -(- 

Season  III.  = 5080  “ “ plus  0 “ 23  hours,  6 “ 

Great  Year  = 19,518  sidereal  months  plus  0 day,  19  hours,  45  minutes  -f- 

Season  I.  began  with  the  1st  of  Thoth. 

Season  II.  “ “ “ 16th  of  Tybi. 

Season  III.  “ “ “ 1st  of  Payni. 

The  decree  of  Canopus,  b.c.  238,  is  dated  “in  the  year  IX., 
7th  month  Apellseus,  the  17th  of  Tybi.”  It  informs  us  “the 


80THIC  AND  PHCENIX  CYCLES. 


51 


rising  of  the  Divine  Sothis  (Sirius)  at  present  occurs  in  his 
9th  year,  the  1st  of  Payni.”  This  heliacal  rising  in  b.c.  238  on 
the  1st  of  Payni  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  third  season  of  the 
Great  Year,  and  by  it  we  obtain  the  following  epochs  for  the 
other  seasons: 

Season  I.  Heliacal  rising  1st  of  Thoth,  b.c.  1318. 

Season  II.  “ “ 16thofTybi,  “ 778. 

Season  III.  “ “ 1st  of  Payni,  “ 238. 

The  first  season,  b.c.  1318,  which  is  in  this  way  found  to  be 
the  beginning  of  the  Sothic  cycle,  has  the  1st  of  Thoth  corre- 
sponding with  the  16th  of  July  of  the  Julian  year,  according  to 
the  method  by  which  the  dates  of  the  vague  year  ai’o  adjusted 
to  the  Julian,  as  explained  in  the  previous  chapter.  The  16th 
of  July,  b.c.  1318,  was  the  day  of  the  full  moon,  and  in  this  way 
the  cycle  is  commenced  with  a heliacal  rising  of  Sirius,  a full 
moon,  and  a sidereal  moon.  The  sidereal  month,  in  this  case, 
is  reckoned  from  full  moon ; the  sidereal  month  is  determined 
by  the  return  of  the  orb,  and  not  by  the  phases  of  the  moon. 

An  inscription  pointed  out  by  Dr.  Brugsch  and  mentioned  by 
Mr.  Cooper  ( Athenceum , May  11,  1861)  contains  the  statement 
that  Sirius  bad  risen  heliacally  on  the  1st  of  Tybi,  in  the 
eleventh  year  of  Takelath  II.  “His  eleventh  regnal  year, 
therefore,  concurred  with  the  year  b.c.  832.”  For  this  fact  1 
am  indebted  to  Yon  Gumpacb  (“  Baby-Worlds”).  I have  found 
that  Season  II.  began  with  the  16th  of  Tybi,  b.c.  778.  There  is 
a difference  of  fifty-four  years  and  fifteen  days  between  this 
date  and  the  1st  of  Tybi,  b.c.  832.  The  star  will  advance  in 
this  time  to  the  15th  of  Tybi.  But  the  special  heliacal  rising 
has  been  limited  by  the  conditions  prevailing  at  the  beginning 
of  the  first  season,  which  had  full  moon  on  the  1st  of  Thoth, 
concurring  with  July  16;  also,  by  the  constitution  of  the  cycle, 
to  the  16tli  of  Tybi  for  the  beginning  of  the  second  season.  In 
the  year  b.c.  778,  the  16th  of  Tybi  coincided  with  July  16,  and 
this  was  also  the  day  of  the  full  moon. 

The  decree  of  Canopus  definitely  settles  the  year  and  date  I 
have  put  for  the  commencement  of  the  third  season.  Sirius 
rose  on  the  1st  of  Payni,  and  this  date  coincided,  b.c.  238,  with 
the  16th  of  July,  which  was  also  the  day  of  the  full  moon. 


52 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


The  dates  of  the  three  great  seasons  thus  obtained  are  as 
follows : 

Season  I.  b.c.  1318,  1st  of  Thoth  = July  16,  full  moon. 

Season  II.  “ 778,  16th  of  Tybi  = “ “ 

Season  III.  “ 238,  1st  of  Payni  = “ “ 

In  the  year  a.d.  143,  when  this  period  of  fourteen  hundred 
and  sixty-one  vague  years  came  to  an  end,  the  1st  of  Thoth 
of  the  vague  year  coincided  with  the  16th  of  July,  and  the 
new  moon  was  on  the  30th  of  June.  The  full  moon  was  on  the 
fifteenth  day  thereafter, — the  15th  of  July. 

The  historical  termination  of  this  cycle  is  connected  with 
matters  bearing  upon  the  adjustment  of  the  vague  to  the  Julian 
year,  which  have  already  been  discussed.  The  authorized  date 
of  the  1st  of  Thoth  in  the  Julian  b.c.  45  is  September  3,  and 
this  is  implied  by  the  vague  1st  of  Thoth  concurring  with  July 
20,  a.d.  138.  I shall  not  here  repeat  my  argument  to  show  that 
this  is  incorrect,  but  only  wish  to  say  the  dates  July  16,  co- 
inciding with  the  Egyptian  dates  as  above  given,  are  inconsistent 
with  the  date  September  3,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  between 
b.c.  238  and  45  the  vague  year  was  advanced  three  days  in  the 
Julian.  The  general  opinion  among  the  learned  has  been  that 
the  Sothic  cycle  began  in  the  year  b.c.  1322  with  the  1st  of 
Thoth,  on  the  20th  of  July,  and  that  it  ended  a.d.  138  with  the 
same  coincident  dates  of  the  Julian  and  vague  years.  The  date 
for  its  beginning  is  without  any  known  contemporary  observa- 
tion, and  is  dependent  upon  a tradition  that  would  make  it  fall 
about  that  time,  and  on  a calculation  which  has  for  its  basis  a 
heliacal  rising  of  Sirius  on  the  20th  of  July,  and  the  1st  of 
Thoth,  a.d.  138. 

Dr.  Sharpe,  in  his  “History  of  Egypt,”  has  the  following: 
“ The  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius  was  remarkable 
as  being  the  end  of  the  Sothic  period  of  fourteen  hundred  and 
sixty  years;  the  movable  New-Year’s  day  of  the  calendar  had 
come  round  to  the  place  in  the  natural  year  from  which  it  first 
began  to  move  in  the  reign  of  Menophres,  or  Thothmosis  III. ; it 
had  come  round  to  the  day  when  the  Dog-star  rose  heliacally.  If 
the  years  had  been  counted  from  the  beginning  of  this  Great 
Year,  there  could  have  been  no  doubt  when  it  came  to  an  end, 


SOTHIC  AND  PHCENIX  CYCLES. 


53 


as  from  the  want  of  a leap-year  the  New-Year’s  day  must  have 
been  moving  one  day  in  four  years;  but  no  satisfactory  reckon- 
ing of  the  years  had  been  kept,  and  as  the  end  of  the  period 
was  only  known  by  observation  there  was  some  little  doubt 
about  the  exact  year.  Indeed,  among  the  Greek  astronomers, 
Dositbeus  said  the  Dog-star  rises  heliacally  twenty-three  days 
after  midsummer,  Meton  twenty-eight  days,  and  Euctemon 
thirty-one  days;  they  thus  left  a doubt  of  thirty-two  years  as 
to  when  the  period  should  end,  but  tbe  statesmen  placed  it  in 
the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  Antoninus.  This  end  of  the  Sothic 
period  was  called,  the  return  of  the  phoenix,  and  had  been  looked 
forward  to  by  the  Egyptians  for  many  years,  and  is  well  marked 
on  the  coins  of  this  reign.”  * 

The  summer  solstice  in  the  time  of  Antoninus  was  on  the 
23d  day  of  June.  The  explanation  which  I am  about  to  give, 
as  to  how  these  twenty-eight  days  were  obtained  for  Meton, 
will  not  only  show  their  factitious  character,  but  will  go  to 
prove  that  July  16,  and  not  July  21,  was  the  proper  day. 

In  the  year  b.c.  1318,  if  the  star  rose  on  the  16th  of  July,  it 
rose  twelve  days  after  the  summer  solstice,  which  was  on  the 
4th  of  this  month.  From  b.c.  1318  to  b.c.  432  are  eight  hun- 
dred and  eighty-six  years.  If  the  calculation  is  by  the  preces- 
sion of  the  star  in  the  tropical  year,  it  will,  between  these  years, 
amount  to  twelve  days,  twelve  hours  plus.  The  portion  of  a 
day  is  discarded,  because  the  exact  hour  of  the  summer  solstice 
is  not  taken  into  the  account.  We  have,  then,  the  time  the 
star  rose  after  the  summer  solstice  b.c.  1318,  which  was  twelve 
days,  plus  the  precession  last  obtained  of  twelve  more  days, 
giving  for  the  number  of  days  the  star  will  rise  in  b.c.  432  after 
the  summer  solstice,  twenty-four  days.  The  summer  solstice  in 
b.c.  432  was  on  the  27th  of  June,  and  twenty-four  days  there- 
after will  bring  the  heliacal  rising  to  the  21st  of  July.  From 
b.c.  432  to  a.d.  138  the  precession  in  the  Julian  is  three  days, 
fifteen  hours,  which,  with  the  twenty-four  days  we  found  for 
the  tropical,  will  give  twenty-eight  days  for  the  time  the  star 
falls  after  the  summer  solstice  in  a.d.  138.  In  a.d.  138  the  sum- 
mer solstice  was  on  June  23,  which  gives  for  the  twenty-eight 


* “ History  of  Egypt”  (Samuel  Sharpe),  chap.  xv.  (32). 
5* 


54 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


days  thereafter  the  21st  of  July.  By  this  the  calculation  is  in 
part  bjr  the  tropical  and  in  part  by  the  Julian,  and  consequently 
inaccurate  as  to  the  precession  of  the  star  in  the  tropical 
year. 

Dosithous  is  given  as  the  authority  for  the  statement  that 
Sirius  rose  twenty-three  dajrs  after  midsummer.  In  the  time  of 
Antoninus,  as  I have  said,  the  summer  solstice  was  on  the 
23d  of  June,  and  twenty-three  days  thereafter  will  bring  the 
rise  of  the  star  to  the  16th  of  July,  thus  confirming,  as  far 
as  this  testimony  goes,  the  date  I have  calculated.  This  same 
calculation  may  be  made  from  the  rise  of  the  star  on  the  16th 
of  July,  b.c.  238. 

The  calculation  of  Euctemon  may  be  obtained  in  the  following 
way:  By  the  arrangement  which  I have  proposed  in  the  previ- 
ous chapter,  the  one  which  causes  September  7 to  concur  with 
the  1st  of  Thoth,  b.c.  45,  if  the  correct  intercalations  are  fol- 
lowed,— that  is,  if  b.c.  9,  the  1st  of  Thoth,  fell  in  with  the  29th 
of  August, — then  in  a.d.  138,  which  is  one  hundred  and  forty- 
six  years  after,  the  precession  of  the  Julian  will  be  thirty- 
six  days.  The  vague  1st  of  Thoth  will  fall  back  that  many 
days  to  July  24,  which  is  thirty-one  days  after  the  summer 
solstice. 

These  calculations  are  made  from  statements  of  astronomers 
who  lived  between  b.c.  200  and  b.c.  432.  That  of  Meton  is  made 
in  reference  to  the  tropical  year  b.c.  432,  and  applying  it  to  the 
time  Sirius  should  rise  after  the  summer  solstice  in  the  time  of 
Antoninus  is  but  repeating  the  mistake  the  priests  made  in  b.c. 
238,  when  they  imagined  by  adding  a day  every  four  years  they 
would  keep  the  star  to  the  1st  of  Payni  and  the  seasons  to  the 
dates  they  then  held ; that  is,  the  idea  that  the  year  of  the 
seasons  and  the  sidereal  year  coincided. 

The  plan  of  the  Sothic  cycle,  which  I have  so  far  advocated, 
does  not  take  into  account  the  precession  of  the  star  in  the 
Julian  ; it  simply  requires  the  special  heliacal  rising  to  be  the 
one  occurring  on  the  day  of  the  full  moon  next  following  the 
summer  solstice.  In  this  way  the  precession  of  the  star  in  the 
Julian  for  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  years  of  nine  days,  plus, 
is  avoided,  and  the  precession  of  the  heliacal  rising  of  the  star 
in  respect  to  the  tropical  is  made  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  the 


SOTHIC  AND  PHOENIX  CYCLES. 


55 


Julian  in  the  tropical  year;  that  is,  the  summer  solstice  start- 
ing twelve  days  before  Juty  16,  b.c.  1318,  falls  back  eleven  days 
to  June  23,  a.d.  143. 


THE  rHCENIX  CYCLE. 

In  connection  with  the  termination  and  beginning  of  the 
Sothic  cycle,  in  the  quotation  taken  from  Mr.  Sharpe,  we  are 
informed  that  they  also  celebrated  the  return  of  the  phoenix. 
The  Phoenix  year  or  cycle  is  described  by  Greek  and  Latin 
writers  in  a fabulous  manner.  The  phoenix  was  a bird  of  beau- 
tiful plumage,  and  very  long-lived.  When  it  dies,  a young  bird 
is  produced  from  tho  dead  body  of  its  father.  The  length  of 
the  fabulous  life  of  this  bird  is  supposed  to  be  that  of  a cycle. 
The  description  is  given  in  language  peculiar  to  the  myth,  and, 
translated  into  plain  speech,  means  one  cycle  was  succeeded  by 
another  like  itself.  The  length  of  this  cycle  is  variously  put. 
Some  give  it  the  same  length  as  the  Sothic, — fourteen  hundred 
and  sixty-one  years;  others  say  it  was  for  six  hundred  and 
sixty ; six  hundred  ; five  hundred  and  forty ; and  five  hundred 
years.  Censorinus,  in  speaking  of  the  Canicular,  which  is  con- 
founded with  the  Phoenix,  says  it  was  called  6 hiauroq,  the  year. 
He  uses  a Greek  word  which  is  used  to  denote  periods  of  time, 
or  great  years,  such  as  cycles.  The  meaning  of  the  word  phoe- 
nix has  been  explained  through  the  word  in  the  Greek,  which 
means  a palm-tree,  the  date-tree,  back  to  the  Egyptian,  who  used 
a palm-branch  as  the  hieroglyphic  of  the  year.  If  the  Phoenix 
cycle  was  of  five  hundred  and  forty  years,  or  if  this  number  of 
years  was  the  length  of  one  of  its  great  seasons,  we  can  readily 
see  how  one  could  be  confounded  with  the  Sothic  cycle.  It  fol- 
lows also  that  if  the  Sothic  was  an  outgrowth  of  the  phoenix, 
we  must  place  the  origin  of  the  former  to  the  period  between  b.c. 
238  and  a.d.  143.  For  up  to  b.c.  238,  if  my  explanation  of  the 
Sothic  is  coi'rect,  the  first  two  seasons  of  that  great  year  were 
the  same  as  those  of  the  Phoenix  year.  These  first  two  seasons 
of  the  Sothic  are  of  such  a character  that  they  far  surpass  the 
third  season  of  that  cycle  in  all  those  things  which  properly 
belong  to  cycles  or  their  subdivisions.  The  Sothic  cycle  could 
not  be  repeated  in  exactly  the  same  form. 

The  use  of  the  Phoenix  is  capable  of  being  extended  to  two 


56 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


thousand  seven  hundred  years.  A period  of  this  many  years 
begins  in  b.c.  1858  and  extends  to  a.d.  843,  and  it  may  be  divided 
into  three  great  seasons,  one  beginning  in  b.c.  1858,  the  second 
in  b.c.  958,  and  the  third  in  b.c.  58.  Bach  of  these  contains 
nine  hundred  yeai’8.  I propose  a cjmle  of  two  thousand  one  hun- 
dred and  sixty  or  sixteen  hundred  and  twenty  years,  according 
as  it  is  given  three  or  four  seasons  of  five  hundred  and  forty 
years. 


B.C. 

1858 

0 

Date 

, 21st  of  Pharmuthi  = 

16th  of  July, 

n 

1318 

540 

ll 

1st  of  Thoth  = 

ll 

n 

778 

540 

ll 

16th  of  Tybi  = 

ll 

ll 

238 

540 

It 

1st  of  Payni  = 

ll 

1620  years. 

A.D. 

303 

540 

ll 

16th  of  Phaophi  = 

ll 

2160  “ 


The  astronomical  basis  of  the  cycle  is  that  five  hundred  and 
forty  Julian  years  are  longer  than  six  thousand  six  hundred  and 
seventy-nine  lunar  months  by  only  four  hours,  thirty  minutes, 
and  three  seconds,  and  longer  than  seven  thousand  two  hundred 
and  nineteen  sidereal  months  by  one  hour,  forty  minutes,  and 
thirty-eight  and  a half  seconds. 


CHAPTER  IY. 

THE  HENTI. 

The  meaning  of  the  word  Henti  is  in  doubt.  By  some  it  is 
applied  generally  to  cycles  such  as  the  Sothic,  etc.  In  a note 
appended  to  M.  P.  Le  Page  Renouf’s  translation  of  Queen 
Hatasu’s  inscription  on  the  base  of  the  great  obelisk  of  Karnak 
(“  Records  of  the  Past”)  is  the  following : “ Double  period  equal 
to  Henti,  a period  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  years,  here  ‘ the 
time  to  come.’  ” * M.  E.  De  Rouge  describes  the  Henti  as  a 


* “ Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  xii.  p.  127. 


THE  HENTI. 


57 


long  period,  the  numerical  value  of  which  was  not  known.  He 
says  it  is  used  in  a resume  of  mythological  reigns  in  the  Turin 
Papyrus  to  denote  a period  of  thousands  of  years.*  The  use 
of  the  word  in  two  or  more  senses,  following  an  analogy,  is  con- 
sistent with  the  ancient  practice.  Just  as  a day,  week,  month, 
year,  and  cycle  are  used  in  their  ordinary  sense,  and  technically 
to  describe  longer  periods  to  which  they  stand  in  the  relation  of 
great  day,  great  month,  etc.,  so  the  Henti  may  be  employed  to 
describe,  in  its  first  use,  a definite  period  of  time,  and,  secondly, 
greater  periods,  and  also,  indefinitely,  great  but  undetermined 
periods,  such  as  “ thousands  of  years.”  In  the  following  hypoth- 
esis it  is  not  intended  to  include  the  question  of  the  original 
meaning  of  the  word.  Still,  in  assuming  that  the  Ilenti  denoted 
a period  of  one  hundred  years,  one  cannot  but  be  struck  with 
the  resemblance  this  word  has  to  others  having  that  meaning 
in  a family  of  languages.  But  such  resemblances  arc  mislead- 
ing unless  the  meaning  of  the  word  is  positively  known.  Cycles 
are  of  two  kinds.  One  is  a time-measure  deriving  its  length 
directly  from  the  repetition  of  astronomical  phenomena,  like  the 
return  of  the  coincident  points  of  lunar  and  solar  time.  The 
other,  while  it  is  referable  to  the  same  kind  of  phenomena,  is 
more  directly  a division  of  time  assumed  for  convenience  of 
counting,  and  is  a direct  outgrowth  of  a mathematical  system, 
such  as  the  decimal.  One  hundred  years  is  a cycle  in  the  latter 
sense.  Herodotus  speaks  of  the  Egyptians  counting  time  by 
generations,  three  of  which  made  up  a century.  Are  we  not  to 
look  for  some  recognition  of  the  century  on  the  monuments,  if 
this  were  the  case?  Its  general  use  as  a round  number  for 
years,  were  we  without  the  testimony  of  Herodotus,  would  lead 
to  the  expectation  of  finding  it,  and  if  not,  the  presumption  is 
so  strong  in  its  favor  that  some  apology  must  be  made  for  its 
absence.  The  twelve  hundred  months  of  one  hundred  vague 
years  may  be  divided  into  generations,  three  to  a century,  which 
will  give  four  hundred  months  to  a generation.  These  cannot 
be  divided  into  years  of  twelve  months  without  a remainder 
over  of  months.  But  by  continuing  the  decimal  system  to  the 
subdivision  of  this  cycle  they  form  three  generations  or  epi- 


* “ Dictionnaire  d’Archeologie  Egyptienne”  (Pierret),  Annee. 


58 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


cycles  each  of  forty  decimestrial  years,  and  one  hundred  years 
contain  one  hundred  and  twenty  such  years. 

Did  the  Egyptians  make  use  of,  for  any  purpose,  a division  of 
time  of  ten  months  ? Dr.  Brugsch  offers  the  hypothesis  that 
“the  little  year”  of  an  inscription  of  the  time  of  the  twelfth 
dynasty  was  the  lunar.  He  means  one  of  twelve  months.  But 
if  they  recognized  any  such,  it  must  have  been  in  connection 
with  the  vague  year  by  some  kind  of  cycle.  By  using  a year 
of  ten  months  this  could  be  done  in  a very  symmetrical  manner. 
The  Egyptians  are  credited  with  a cycle  called  the  Apis.  It  is 
composed  of  twenty-five  vague  years.  This  number  is  taken 
because  that  many  years  are  only  one  hour,  nine  minutes,  and 
eighteen  seconds  longer  than  three  hundred  and  nine  synods  of 
the  moon.  Four  Apis  cycles  form  a total  of  one  hundred  years, 
and  are  four  hours,  thirty-seven  minutes,  and  twelve  seconds 
longer  than  twelve  hundred  and  thirty-six  lunar  months. 

The  three  hundred  and  nine  lunar  months  of  each  cycle  may 
be  formed  into  thirty  decimestrial  years,  with  nine  intercalary 
months,  which  were  added  in  one  body,  according  to  the  Egyp- 
tian practice,  and  probably  at  the  beginning  of  the  cycle.  The 
reason  for  this  last  statement  is  obtained  from  the  inscriptions 
of  the  Apis  stelae  discovered  by  Mariette.  From  these  we 
learn  that  a period  of  nine  months  regularly  intervened  between 
the  birth  of  the  Apis  bull  and  his  introduction  into  the  temple. 
This  will  give  for  one  bundi-ed  years  one  hundred  and  twenty 
lunar  vague  years,  with  the  subdivisions  of  four  generations  of 
thirty  decimestrial  years.  Again,  the  twelve  hundred  and 
thirty-six  lunar  months  of  the  one  hundred  years  may  be 
divided  into  three  generations  of  four  hundred  and  twelve 
months  each,  or  forty  lunar  years  of  ten  months,  with  an  inter- 
calary year  of  twelve  months. 

The  employment  of  several  years  by  the  Egyptians  must  be 
understood  to  mean  that  they  used  various  time-measures  which 
were  called  years,  and  that  none  of  these  were  independent  of 
the  vague,  but  marked  it  off  into  greater  or  smaller  periods. 

Dr.  Birch  says,  “ Philologically,  it  has  been  attempted  to  be 
proved  that  there  were  two  years,  from  such  expressions  as  ‘ the 
first  year,’  ap  tep,  or  rempa ; ‘the  opening  of  the  year,’  ap  rempa 
and  un  rempa;  and  ‘the  ending  year,’  arg  rempa;  but  doubt  is 


THE  HENTI. 


59 


thrown  upon  the  philological  position  by  the  consideration  that 
ap  rempa  may  mean  ‘ yearl3T,’  as  ap  abut  means  1 monthly’  in 
the  Eosetta  inscription.”*  May  not  this  term  “ monthly”  refer 
to  a division  of  a cycle  called  a month  ; that  is,  a great  month  ? 
It  is  used  in  connection  with  the  cycle  of  which  Epiphanes 
became  the  eponym  in  b.c.  196.  But,  be  this  as  it  may,  they 
undoubtedly  used  the  terms  year  and  month,  in  the  time  of  the 
Eosetta  stone,  in  two  senses,  or  we  must  confine  the  tradition  of 
the  Sothic  to  a very  late  period.  The  testimony  of  ancient 
writers  is  often  in  this  direction.  Suidas  f says  they  called  a 
year  a day ; Diodorus  Siculus,  J a year  a revolution  of  the  moon  ; 
and  Eusebius  § clinches  it  with  “ enim  mensem  unum  illi  annum 
vocabant."  It  is  true,  writers  have  used  this  fact  to  reduce 
periods  of  years  which  they  think  to  be  unreasonably  long; 
but  in  doing  this  they  have  reversed  the  proceeding.  The 
Egyptians  might  call  a thousand  years  a day,  but  never,  correctly, 
a day  a thousand  years.  The  distinction  is  that  where  such  usages 
occur  the  period,  instead  of  being  decreased  by  rendering  the 
terms  into  ordinary  days  and  years,  should  be  numerically 
increased  by  that  operation. 

The  employment  of  the  Henti  in  the  mythological  reigns  has 
the  following  scope.  The  thirty  dynasties  of  the  Old  Chronicle 
are  said  to  reign  thirty-six  thousand  five  hundred  and  twenty- 
five  years,  “ which  number  of  years,  resolved  and  divided  into 
its  constituent  parts,  that  is  to  say,  twenty-five  times  fourteen 
hundred  and  sixty-one  years,  shows  that  it  relates  to  the  fabled 
periodical  revolution  of  the  Zodiac;  that  is,  its  revolution  from 
a particular  point  to  the  same  again,  which  point  is  the  first 
minute  of  the  first  degree  of  that  equinoctial  sign  tvhich  they 
call  the  Earn,  as  it  is  explained  in  the  Genesis  of  Hermes,  and 
in  the  C}'raunian  books.”|| 

It  must  be  noticed  that  there  are  two  contemplations  of  the 
Egyptian  year  in  reference  to  the  period  of  the  Sothic  cycle,  and 
these  follow  it  through  longer  periods  and  developments.  One 
contemplates  the  real  fact, — that  is,  the  year  is  always  of  three 


* “ The  Ancient  Egyptians”  (Wilkinson),  vol.  ii.  p.  372. 
f Cory’s  “Fragments,”  p.  160.  J Ibid.,  p.  164. 

||  Ibid.,  p.  91. 


§ Ibid.,  p.  92. 


60 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


hundred  and  sixty -five  days ; the  other  looks  upon  the  Sothic 
period  of  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-one  vague  years  as  if  it 
were  only  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty  years,  to  which  have  been 
added  one  day  every  four  years.  In  other  words,  one  considers 
the  fact  that  four  vague  years  equal  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty 
days;  the  other  that  four  years  of  the  Sothic  period  amount  to 
the  average  of  fourteen  hundred  and  sixty-one  days.  It  is  owing 
to  this  that  the  Egyptian  year  is  so  often  misunderstood. 

Some  have  supposed  what  was  merely  a contemplation  to  be  an 
actual  fact;  that  is,  they  had  a year  to  which  a day  was  added 
every  four  years,  and  back  of  this  was  a like  misconception, — 
that  the  year  was  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  and  a quarter 
days.  These  numbers  are  all  factors  in  the  development  of  the 
great  period,  viz. : 

Real  year,  365  days.  Fictitious  year,  3651  days. 

“ quadrennial,  1460  “ “ quadrennial,  1461  “ 

“ Sothic  period,  1461  years.  “ Sothic  period,  1460  years. 

In  connection  with  greater  periods  than  the  Sothic,  but  which 
are  developed  from  it,  the  Ilenti,  if  we  may  so  call  the  cycle  of 
one  hundred  years,  enters  as  a unit.  One  hundred  years  are  a 
great  day ; three  hundred  and  sixty-five  great  days,  or  thirty- 
six  thousand  five  hundred  years,  form  a great  year;  three  hun- 
dred and  sixty-five  and  a quarter  fictitious  great  days  equal  one 
fictitious  great  year,  or  thirty-six  thousand  five  hundred  and 
twenty-five  years;  and  four  of  these  last  make  one  hundred 
Sothic  cycles,  or  one  hundred  and  forty-six  thousand  one  hun- 
dred years. 

Dr.  Lepsius  explains  the  period  of  thirty-six  thousand  five 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years  to  be  the  sidereal  year  caused 
by  the  precession  of  the  equinoxes,  imperfectly  comprehended, 
but  expressed  in  its  greatest  period  of  thirty-six  thousand  five 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years. 


THE  SET  OR  CYCLE  OF  THIRTY  YEARS. 


61 


CHAPTER  Y. 

THE  SET  OR  CYCLE  OP  THIRTY  YEARS. 

This  cycle,  called  by  the  Greeks  Triakonteris,  is  repeatedly 
mentioned  upon  the  monuments.  “ In  the  reign  of  Pepi  mention 
is  made  for  the  first  time  on  the  monuments  of  his  day  of  a 
festival  closely  connected  with  the  chronology  of  Egypt,  called 
Hib-set,  ‘ the  festival  of  the  tail,’  in  memory  of  the  end  and  the 
beginning  of  a new  period  of  years.  In  the  eighteenth  year  of 
his  government  took  place  the  renewal  of  Hib-set,  on  the  first 
section  of  ‘the  feast  of  the  tail,’ — that  is,  ‘the  cycle  of  thirty 
years.’  A learned  German,  Mr.  Gensler,  who  has  specially 
occupied  himself  with  inquiries  and  learning  relating  to  the 
course  of  the  stars  in  connection  with  the  information  of  the 
monuments,  appears  to  us  to  have  established  the  right  view  by 
his  hypothesis,  that  the  cycle  of  thirty  vague  years  served  to 
regulate  according  to  a fixed  rule  of  numbers  the  coincident 
points  of  the  solar  and  lunar  years  by  means  of  a great  period 
of  eleven  synodic  months  intercalated  in  the  years  0,4,  7,  10,  12, 
14,  16,  18,  20,  23,  26,  30  (=  0)  of  the  period.  The  real  nature 
of  this  cycle  of  thirty  years  seems  to  us  contained  in  the  previ- 
ously-mentioned period  of  years  which,  as  we  said,  were  con- 
nected with  the  sun  and  moon.  The  Greek  translator  of  the 
holy  term  Hib-set,  in  the  Egyptian  part  of  the  celebrated  Rosetta 
stone,  renders  this  expression  by  the  term  period  of  thirty  years.”* 
I fail  to  see  what  Dr.  Brugsch  discovers  in  Mr.  Gensler’s  hypoth- 
esis. 

Thirty  vague  years  contain  ten  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
fifty  days,  and  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  synods  of  the 
moon  equal  thirty  lunar  years  of  twelve  months  plus  eleven 
intercalai’y  months.  This  period  of  lunar  months  (three  hun- 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  viii.  pp.  102,  103. 
Eng.  trans. 


6 


62 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


dred  and  seventy-one)  contains  ten  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
fifty-five  days,  twenty  hours  plus,  which  is  five  days,  twenty 
hours  plus  more  time  than  thirty  vague  years.  If  thirty  Julian 
years  are  intended,  then  the  lunar  period  is  over  a day  too  short. 
By  a cycle  of  thirty  years  the  coincident  points  of  the  solar  and 
lunar  years  are  not  preserved.  It  is  unreasonable  to  suppose 
the  Egyptians  made  use  of  such  a cycle,  when  a better  one  was 
at  hand,  the  Apis  cycle,  with  the  “ coincident  points”  for  each 
only  separated  by  one  hour,  eight  minutes,  thirty-three  seconds. 

There  are  several  notices  of  these  thirty  years’,  or  jubilee,  festi- 
vals. In  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.  his  jubilee,  or  thirty  years’ 
festival,  was  celebrated  with  great  applause  throughout  the 
country.  “ The  return  of  this  festival  also  seems  to  have  been 
reckoned  according  to  a fixed  cycle  of  years,  perhaps  when  the 
lunar  and  solar  years  coincided  at  short  intervals  of  three  or 
four  years,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  festivals.  In  the 
thirtieth  year  Khamus  celebrated  the  feast  under  his  own 
superintendence,  according  to  usage  and  prescription,  in  Bigeh 
and  Silsilis,  where,  at  that  time,  Khai  was  governor  of  the  dis- 
trict, while  at  El  Kab  the  governor  Ta  conducted  the  festivities. 
The  repetition  of  the  succeeding  jubilees  took  place, — the  second 
in  the  thirty-fourth  year,  the  third  in  the  thirty-seventh  year, 
and  the  fourth  in  the  fortieth  year  of  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.”* 
If  I am  not  mistaken,  the  festivals  of  the  years  30,  34,37,  and 
40  have  been  used  by  Mr.  Gensler  to  indicate  those  of  the  first 
ten  years  of  his  cycle  which  receive  intercalations.  Years  0,  4, 
7,  and  10  correspond  as  to  their  relative  positions  to  years  30, 34, 
37,  and  40,  and  this  is  why  he  weakens  his  cycle  at  another  point, 
by  allowing  only  two  intercalations  in  a period  of  nine  years,  when 
the  proper  number  is  three  in  eight  years.  Again,  from  year 
23  of  the  cycle  to  year  4 of  next  cycle,  excluding  both  extremes 
which  receive  intercalations,  is  a space  of  ten  years  containing 
only  two  intercalary  years,  the  twenty-sixth  and  the  thirtieth. 
In  no  way  are  the  “coincident  points  of  lunar  and  solar  time” 
preserved.  The  constitution  or  genius  of  the  Egyptian  system 
requires  the  retention  of  the  vague  year.  It  seems  to  me  the 


* Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xiv.  p.  110. 
Eng.  trans. 


THE  SET  OR  CYCLE  OF  THIRTY  YEARS. 


63 


better  plan  to  follow,  in  the  investigation  of  this  subject,  is  to 
search  for  some  reason  for  the  observance  of  the  jubilee  cycle  of 
thirty  jmars,  which,  while  retaining  the  vague,  will  group  a 
fixed  number  of  these  years  into  cycles. 

The  first  point  to  be  determined  is  the  number  of  years  in 
the  cycle.  This  has  been  understood  to  be  thirty.  But  is  this 
the  case?  The  festival,  it  is  true,  is  connected  with  a thirtieth 
year,  but,  if  it  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  cycle,  then  it  began 
a period  of  twenty-nine  years : a first  year  is  a thirtieth  count- 
ing from  the  first  year  of  the  previous  cycle.  Now,  twenty-nine 
years  is  a solar  period;  in  this  time  the  tropical  year  advances 
in  the  vague  seven  days,  no  hours,  thirty-five  minutes,  and 
twelve  seconds.  Again,  if  we  understand  four  of  these  cycles  of 
twenty-nine  years  were  counted  each  from  a different  tropical 
point,  each  measuring  separately  the  tropical  period,  which 
would  show  a nicety  in  the  mode  of  measurement  creditable  to 
the  Egyptians,  there  will  be  four  distinct  festivals  celebrated. 
To  one  of  these,  that  at  the  summer  solstice,  more  importance 
will,  perhaps,  be  attached ; at  least,  we  might  expect  it  in  some 
instances,  in  accordance  with  the  important,  but  not  exclusive, 
place  this  point  of  the  sun’s  annual  course  held  in  their  system 
of  time-measurement. 

If  these  festivals  of  Bameses  II.  are  treated  in  this  way  the 
cycles  will  be  according  to  the  following  table.  I have  provi- 
sionally headed  the  four  columns  containing  the  years  of  the  four 
cycles,  summer  solstice,  autumnal  equinox,  winter  solstice,  vernal 
equinox,  as  denoting  the  points  of  the  year  at  which  their  first 
years  begin. 


J.  30 

Summer 

Solstice. 

1 

Autumnal 

Equinox. 

26 

Winter 

Solstice. 

23 

Vernal 

Equinox. 

20 

31 

2 

27 

24 

21 

32 

3 

28 

25 

22 

33 

4 

29 

26 

23 

J.  34 

5 

1 

27 

24 

35 

6 

2 

28 

25 

36 

7 

3 

29 

26 

J.  37 

8 

4 

1 

27 

38 

9 

5 

2 

28 

39 

10 

6 

3 

29 

40 

11 

7 

4 

1 

64 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


If  the  cycle  of  twenty-nine  years  is  begun  with  a tropical 
point  at  the  beginning  of  the  civil  day  it  will  continue  to  fall 
seven  days  later  for  each  cycle  in  the  vague  year  for  forty-one 
cycles  or  eleven  hundred  and  eighty-nine  years,  when  it  will 
pass  to  the  eighth  day,  and  then  will  continue  to  fall  seven  days 
later,  as  before.  The  advance  of  the  tropical  year  for  eleven 
hundred  and  eighty-nine  years  is  two  hundred  and  eighty-eight 
days,  which,  divided  by  forty-one,  gives  seven  days  and  one 
remainder.  If  a sufficient  number  of  instances  of  these  jubilee 
cycles  can  be  obtained  from  the  monuments  to  confirm  this  view 
of  these  cycles,  they  would  render  great  help  in  settling  the 
chronology  of  this  nation. 


CHAPTEE  YI. 

EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 

In  the  following  endeavor  to  establish  certain  Egyptian  chron- 
ological epochs  I have  confined  myself  to  the  period  between 
the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  and  the  Persian  in- 
vasion. 

The  epochs  of  three  kings  who  reigned  during  this  period 
furnish  the  starting-points  from  which  other  epochs — those  of 
intervening  kings — may  be  estimated.  The  three  kings  are 
Thutmes  III.,  Eameses  II.,  and  Takelath  II.  Epochs  of  these 
will  be  determined  by  monumental  data. 

EPOCH  OP  THUTMES  III. 

This  reign  is  the  first  to  be  considered,  not  on  account  of  its 
importance  in  a political  way,  for  Thutmes  III.  was  the  greatest 
king  of  this  dynasty,  but  because  an  inscription  of  his  furnishes 
some  of  the  necessary  facts  by  which  may  be  established  the 
epoch  of  his  reign,  and  within  very  narrow  limits  that  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  of  which  he  was  the  fifth  king.  One  of 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


65 


the  many  inscriptions  relating  to  his  reign  gives  an  account  of 
the  laying  of  a foundation-stone  of  a temple  at  Thebes. 

The  portion  to  be  noticed  is  as  follows  (Thutmcs  is  speaking 
in  the  inscription) : “ I gave  the  order  to  prepare  the  cord  and 

pegs  (for  laying  of  the  foundation)  in  my  presence.  The  ad- 
vent of  the  day  of  the  new  moon  was  fixed  for  the  festival  of 
the  laying  of  the  foundation-stone  of  this  memorial.  In  the  year 
24,  on  the  last  day  of  the  month  Mekhir,  on  the  festival  of  the 
tenth  day  of  Amon’s  festival  on  his  splendid  feast  of  Southern 
Ape.”  * 

It  was  the  custom  of  the  Egyptians  and  other  ancient  nations 
to  set  up  memorials  of  the  events  they  wished  not  to  be  for- 
gotten. An  instance  for  the  Jews  were  the  twelve  stones  Joshua 
pitched  in  Gilgal  for  a memorial  of  their  coming  out  of  Jordan 
on  the  tenth  day  of  the  first  month.  These  memorials  served 
two  purposes : to  keep  the  memory  of  some  important  historical 
event,  and,  when  they  preserved  the  date  of  their  erection,  also 
the  time  of  the  same;  and  to  commemorate  some  astronomical 
or  chronological  fact,  or  both,  by  means  of  which  the  year  of 
the  king’s  reign  in  which  they  were  put  up,  or  the  year  of  some 
cycle  to  which  they  referred,  might  be  known  as  long  as  the 
monument  should  last.  A case  for  the  Egyptians  was  the  memo- 
rial-stone  erected  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.,  which  bore  the 
inscription,  “ In  the  year  400,  the  month  Mesori,  the  fourth 
day  of  King  Set  ’Apehuti-Nub.” 

We  are  furnished  by  the  inscription  of  Thutmes  III.  with  the 
fact  that  in  the  year  24  the  new  moon  fell  on  the  30th  of  Mechir. 
We  are  to  find  the  year  in  which  the  new  moon  fell  on  the  30th 
of  Mechir ; secondly,  a 30th  of  Mechir  with  a new  moon  in  con- 
nection with  some  other  fact  that  will  sever  it  from  all  others, 
and  the  significance  of  the  year  24,  whether  it  was  a regnal 
year  or  one  of  a cycle.  Although  Egyptologists  differ  as  to  the 
epoch  of  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.,  yet  there  are  limits  to  their 
divergence,  and  at  the  outset  the  search  will  lie  in  a period 
covered  by  a hundred  or  so  years.  By  the  adjustment  of  the 
vague  to  the  Julian,  on  the  testimony  of  Timocharis,  the  17th 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  384.  Eng. 
trans. 


6* 


66 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


of  Mesori  concurred  with  the  8th  of  October,  b.c.  272.  The 
advance  of  the  Julian  in  the  vague  is  one  day  every  four  years, 
and  calculating  back  from  b.c.  272,  it  is  found  that  the  30th  of 
Mechir  fell  on  the  3d  of  January  for  four  years  from  b.c.  1288 
to  1285,  inclusive.  It  is  also  found  that  the  3d  of  January,  b.c. 
1288,  was  the  day  of  the  new  moon,  and  also  of  the  winter  sol- 
stice, and  consequently  the  same  is  true  of  the  30th  of  Mechir 
in  this  year.  We  are  to  confirm  this  by  the  year  24.  I now  turn 
to  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.  We  begin  with  the  memorial-stone 
already  alluded  to.  The  portion  demanding  attention  is  as  follows : 

“His  majesty  (King  Eamessu  II.)  gave  orders  to  raise  a 
great  memorial  of  granite  (of  Syene)  to  the  exalted  name  of 
his  father,  animated  by  the  desire  to  uphold  thereby  the  name 
of  his  (royal)  father  and  his  forefathers.  May  the  remembrance 
of  King  Mineptah  Seti  II.  remain  and  endure  for  ever,  to-day 
and  every  day.  In  the  year  400,  the  month  Mesori,  the  fourth 
day,  of  King  Set ’Apehuti-Nub,  the  friend  of  the  god  Hormakhu 
— may  he  live  for  ever  and  ever.”* 

The  4th  day  of  Mesori  is  the  date  of  this  memorial.  Follow- 
ing the  clue  furnished  by  the  memorial  of  Thutmes  III.,  and 
looking  for  something  similar  in  this  case,  we  find  that  from 
b.c.  1020  to  b.c.  1017  the  4th  of  Mesori  was  at  the  vernal  equi- 
nox, and  in  the  year  1018  the  4th  of  Mesori  was  the  day  of  the 
full  moon.  In  b.c.  1018  the  vernal  equinox  was  on  March  31  of 
the  Julian  year. 

I next  take  up  the  jubilee  cycles  on  record  in  this  reign.  The 
subject  has  been  discussed  in  the  exposition  of  the  hypothesis 
of  the  Hib-set.  The  beginnings  of  these  cycles  are  now  to  be 
adjusted  to  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.  and  the  Julian  year.  In 
the  following  short  table  the  thirty  years’  jubilee  connected  with 
the  vernal  equinox  is  begun  with  the  jubilee  of  Eameses’s  fortieth 
year,  and  in  the  same  year  we  have  found  for  the  memorial  of 
King  Nub.  By  this  means  I adjust  these  cycles  to  the  Julian 
year. 

The  following  is  the  table  given  on  page  63,  with  the  addition 
of  the  year  before  Christ : 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugseh),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xiv.  p.  94.  Eng. 
trans. 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


67 


Years  of 

Summer 

Autumnal 

Winter 

Vernal 

B.C. 

Rameses  II. 

Solstice. 

Equinox. 

Solstice. 

Equinox. 

1028 

J.  30 

1 

26 

23 

20 

1027 

31 

2 

27 

24 

21 

1026 

32 

3 

28 

25 

22 

1025 

33 

4 

29 

26 

23 

1024 

J.  34 

5 

I 

27 

24 

1023 

35 

6 

2 

28 

25 

1022 

36 

7 

3 

29 

26 

1021 

J.  37 

8 

4 

1 

27 

1020 

38 

9 

5 

2 

28 

1019 

39 

10 

6 

3 

29 

1018 

J.  40 

11 

7 

4 

1 

According  to  the  explanation  of  these  cycles  which  I have 
given,  they  each  contain  twenty-nine  years  and  measure  sepa- 
rately the  tropical  year.  In  Rameses  II. ’s  first  year  began  a cycle 
of  the  jubilee  of  the  summer  solstice.  In  his  thirtieth  year,  b.c. 
1028,  he  begins  a second  cycle  of  the  same  kind.  This  cycle  of 
his  thirtieth  year  “ was  the  occasion  of  great  festivities  through- 
out the  country.”  It  was  the  first  cycle  of  the  kind  celebrated 
by  Rameses  II.  The  special  honor  connected  with  this  one  is 
found  in  a pious  belief  that  its  renewal  was  a particular  mark 
of  the  favor  of  the  gods.  The  concluding  words  of  the  poem 
of  Pentaur  are,  “ May  they  (the  gods)  secure  to  him  without 
end  many  thirty  years’  feasts  of  jubilee  for  ever  on  the  chair 
of  his  father  Turn,  and  may  all  lands  be  at  his  feet.”  This  jubilee 
of  his  thirtieth  year  being  the  first  instance  of  this  special 
favor  of  the  gods,  receives  very  marked  attention.  The  other 
jubilees  mentioned — of  the  thirty-fourth  year,  b.c.  1024,  of  the 
autumnal  equinox,  of  the  thirty-seventh  year,  b.c.  1021,  of  the 
winter  solstice,  of  the  fortieth  year,  b.c.  1018,  of  the  vernal 
equinox — all  follow  it. 

The  one  of  b.c.  1018  is  the  key  of  the  whole  arrangement. 
The  following  table  carries  a series  of  these  cycles  forward  and 
backward  from  those  in  the  reign  of  Rameses : 


Table  of  Jubilee  Cycles. 


B.C. 

Summer  Solstice. 

B.C. 

Autumnal  Eq. 

B.C. 

Winter  Solstice. 

B.C. 

Vernal  Eq. 

1405 

3d  Mesori. 

1401 

3d  Athyr. 

1398 

4th  Mechir. 

1395 

3d  Pachons. 

1376 

10th  “ 

1372 

10th  “ 

1369 

11th  “ 

1366 

10th 

1347 

17th  “ 

1343 

17th  “ 

1340 

18th 

1337 

17  th  “ 

1318 

24th  “ 

1314 

24th  “ 

1311 

25th 

1308 

24th  “ 

68 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


Table  of  Jubilee  Cycles  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Summer  Solstice. 

B.C. 

Autumnal  Eq. 

B.C. 

Winter  Solstice. 

B.C. 

Vernal  Eq. 

1289 

1st  Intercalary. 

1285 

1st  Khoiakh. 

1282 

2d  Phamenoth. 

1279 

1st  Payni. 

1260 

3d  Thoth. 

1256 

8th  “ 

1253 

9th 

1250 

8th  “ 

1231 

10th  “ 

1227 

15th  “ 

1224 

16  th  “ 

1221 

15th  “ 

1202 

17th  “ 

1198 

22d  “ 

1195 

23d 

1192 

22d  “ 

1173 

24th  “ 

1169 

29th  “ 

1166 

30th 

1163 

29th  “ 

1144 

1st  Phaophi. 

1140 

6th  Tybi. 

1137 

7th  Pharmuthi.  1134 

6th  Epiphi. 

1115 

8th  “ 

1111 

13th  “ 

1108 

14th 

1105 

13th  “ 

1086 

15th  “ 

1082 

20th  “ 

1079 

21st  “ 

1076 

20th  “ 

1057 

22d 

1053 

27th  “ 

1050 

28th 

1047 

27th  “ 

1028 

29  th  “ 

1024 

4th  Mechir. 

1021 

5th  Pachons. 

1018 

4th  Mesori. 

999 

7th  Athyr. 

995 

11th  “ 

993 

12th 

989 

Uth  “ 

970 

14th  “ 

966 

18th  “ 

964 

19th  “ 

960 

18th 

941 

21st  “ 

937 

25th  “ 

935 

26th 

934 

25th  “ 

912 

28th  “ 

908 

2d  Phamenoth. 

906 

3d  Payni. 

902 

2d  Interca- 

lary. 

883 

5th  Khoiakh. 

879 

9th 

877 

10th  “ 

873 

4th  Thoth. 

As  the  vernal  equinox  was  probably  observed  at  noon  of  the 
4th  of  Mesori,  taking  this  as  an  era,  each  cycle  forward  or 
backward  according  to  its  number,  counted  from  that  of  B.c. 
1018  as  year  0,  begins  on  the  date  and  at  the  time  produced  by 
multiplying  seven  days,  thirty -five  minutes,  and  twelve  seconds 
by  the  number  of  cycles,  and  adding  the  product,  if  counting 
forward,  or  deducting,  if  counting  backward,  to  and  from,  as 
the  case  may  be,  the  4th  of  Mesori  twelve  hours,  noon.  This 
is  done  to  keep  the  error  of  the  cycle,  as  far  as  this  method  will 
allow,  from  increasing. 

The  inscription  of  Amenemhib  gives  the  length  of  the  reign 
of  Thutmes  III.  as  follows : 

35.  “ Behold  then  the  king  finished  his  course  of  life,  after 
many  years  glorified  by  conquests,  and  by  (sieges)  36,  and  by 
triumphs,  beginning  in  the  first  year  (and  finishing)  in  the  last 
day  of  Phamenoth,  in  the  fifty-foui’th  year  of  his  reign.”  * 

Dr.  Brugsch  supposes  this  term  to  include  also  the  reign  of 
his  sister  Hatasou,  who  preceded  him.  Thutmes  I.  left  three 
children, — Thutmes  II.,  a daughter,  Queen  Hatasou,  and  Thut- 
mes III.  Queen  Hatasou  was  associated  with  her  brother 
Thutmes  II.  upon  the  throne.  He,  after  a short  reign,  dies,  and 
Hatasou  assumes  the  whole  authority.  Her  enmity  to  her 
brother,  the  deceased  king,  was  such  that  she  erased  his  name 

* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  355. 
Eng.  trans. 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


69 


from  the  monuments.  Thutmes  III.  at  this  time  was  a minor, 
and  passed  his  time  in  seclusion,  and  it  was  not  before  he 
reached  man’s  estate  that  he  was  able  to  assume  the  power 
which  was  until  then  withheld  from  him  by  his  sister. 

Dr.  Brugsch  and  others  are  of  the  opinion  that  Thutmes  III. 
did  not  acknowledge  the  right  of  his  sister  to  the  throne,  and 
therefore  assumed  as  his  own  the  years  she  reigned  during  his 
minority, — that  is,  from  the  death  of  Thutmes  II. 

But  I have,  for  reasons  which  will  appear,  made  Thutmes’s 
reign  not  only  to  cover  the  time  from  the  death  of  Thutmes  II., 
but  also  from  the  death  of  their  common  father,  Thutmes  I. 

I have  provisionally  begun  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.,  including 
in  it  the  years  of  Thutmes  II.  and  Queen  Hatasou,  in  b.c.  1341. 

The  following  table  begins  in  b.c.  1347,  the  year  of  the  jubilee 
of  the  summer  solstice,  and  covers  the  fifty-three  years,  plus , of 
Thutmes’s  reign,  and  ends  in  b.o.  1287.  I have  also  given  in 
the  same  connection  the  concurrent  reigns  of  Thutmes  II.  and 
Queen  Hatasou : 


Years  of 

Years  of 

Years  of 

Date  of  1st  of 

Jubilee  Cycles. 

Thutmes 

Hatasou. 

Thutmes 

Tlioth  in  the 

II. 

III. 

Julian. 

B.C. 

s.  s. 

A.  E. 

W.  S.  V.  E. 

1347 

1 

26 

23 

20 

July  23. 

1346 

2 

27 

24 

21 

B. 1345 

3 

28 

25 

22 

July  22. 

1344 

4 

29 

26 

23 

1343 

5 

I 

27 

24 

1342 

6 

2 

28 

25 

B.  1341 

7 

3 

29 

26 

1 

1 

July  21. 

1340 

8 

4 

1 

27 

1-2 

1-  2 

1339 

9 

5 

2 

28 

2-3 

CO 

1 

1338 

10 

6 

3 

29 

3-4 

CO 

1 

B.  1337 

11 

7 

4 

1 

4-5 

4-  6 

July  20. 

1336 

12 

8 

5 

2 

6-6 

5-  6 

1335 

13 

9 

6 

3 

6-7 

6-  7 

1334 

14 

10 

7 

4 

7-8 

-4 

1 

00 

B. 1333 

15 

11 

8 

5 

8-9 

1 

8-  9 

July  19. 

1332 

16 

12 

9 

6 

9 

1-2 

9-10 

1331 

17 

13 

10 

7 

2-3 

10-11 

1330 

18 

14 

11 

8 

3-4 

11-12 

B.  1329 

19 

15 

12 

9 

4-5 

12-13 

July  18. 

1328 

20 

16 

13 

10 

5-6 

13-14 

1327 

21 

17 

14 

11 

6-7 

14-15 

1326 

22 

18 

15 

12 

7-8 

15-16 

70 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY, 


Years  of 

Years  of 

Years  of 

Date  of  1st  of 

Jubilee  Cycles. 

Thutmes 

Hatasou. 

Thutmes 

Thoth  in  the 

II. 

III. 

Julian. 

B.C. 

S.  S. 

A.  E.  W.  S. 

V.  E. 

B.  1325 

23 

19 

16 

13 

8-  9 

16-17 

July  17. 

1324 

24 

20 

17 

14 

9-10 

17-18 

1323 

25 

21 

18 

15 

10-11 

18-19 

1322 

26 

22 

19 

16 

11-12 

19-20 

B.  1321 

27 

23 

20 

17 

12-13 

20-21 

July  16. 

1320 

28 

24 

21 

18 

13-14 

21-22 

1319 

29 

25 

22 

19 

14-15 

22-23 

1318 

1 

26 

23 

20 

15-16 

23-24 

B.  1317 

2 

27 

24 

21 

16 

24-25 

July  15. 

1316 

3 

28 

25 

22 

25-26 

1315 

4 

29 

26 

23 

26-27 

1314 

5 

1 

27 

24 

27-28 

B. 1313 

6 

2 

28 

25 

28-29 

July  14. 

1312 

7 

3 

29 

26 

29-30 

1311 

8 

4 

1 

27 

30-31 

1310 

9 

5 

2 

28 

31-32 

B.  1309 

10 

6 

3 

29 

32-33 

July  13. 

1308 

11 

7 

4 

1 

33-34 

1307 

12 

8 

5 

2 

34-35 

1306 

13 

9 

6 

3 

* 

35-36 

B.  1305 

14 

10 

7 

4 

36-37 

July  12. 

1304 

15 

11 

8 

5 

37-38 

1303 

16 

12 

9 

6 

38-39 

1302 

17 

13 

10 

7 

39-40 

B.  1301 

18 

14 

11 

8 

40-41 

July  11. 

1300 

19 

15 

12 

9 

41-42 

1299 

20 

16 

13 

10 

42-43 

1298 

21 

17 

14 

11 

43-44 

1297 

22 

18 

15 

12 

44-45 

July  10. 

1296 

23 

19 

16 

13 

45-46 

1295 

24 

20 

17 

14 

46-47 

1294 

25 

21 

18 

15 

47-48 

B.  1293 

26 

22 

19 

16 

48-49 

July  9. 

1292 

27 

23 

20 

17 

49-50 

1291 

28 

24 

21 

18 

50-51 

1290 

29 

25 

22 

19 

51-52 

B. 1289 

1 

26 

23 

20 

52-53 

July  8. 

1288 

2 

27 

24 

21 

53-54 

1287 

3 

28 

25 

22 

54 

I.  The  first 

point 

to  be  noticed  is 

i,  the  jubilee  cycles 

are  calcu- 

lated  back  from  the  reign  of  Raineses  II.,  or  about  two  hundred 
and  eighty  years  later  than  the  time  of  Thutmes  III. ; and  that 


EGYPTIAN"  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


71 


the  years  of  these  cycles  fall  in  those  of  the  reign  of  Thutmes 
by  the  simple  force  of  numbers.  There  is  no  contrivance  to 
make  them  so  fall  artificially.  It  was  found  that  b.c.  1288, 
January  3 equalled  Mechir  30,  and  the  hypothesis  was  advanced 
that  this  year  and  these  dates  were  those  of  the  foundation  of 
a temple  at  Thebes  by  Thutmes  III.  The  one  point  left  unset- 
tled was  the  meaning  of  the  year  24.  By  reference  to  the  table 
just  given,  the  number  24  will  be  found  as  the  current  year 
of  the  jubilee  cycle  of  the  winter  solstice.  The  temple  was 
founded  in  b.c.  1288  and  year  24  of  the  jubilee  cycle  of  the  winter 
solstice  of  b.c.  1311,  on  the  30th  of  Mechir,  concurrent  with 
January  3,  and  day  of  the  new  moon  and  of  the  winter  solstice. 
The  year  b.c.  1311  was  also  the  epoch  of  the  first  year  of  the 
two  series  of  Apis  cycles  described  in  a previous  chapter,  and 
Mechir  30,  in  b.c.  1288,  fell  on  the  last  day  of  the  twenty-third 
year  of  series  beginning  with  Pjjamenoth  and  in  the  twenty- 
third  year  of  the  series  beginning  with  Thoth. 

II.  The  following  additional  historical  facts  are  from  the 
monuments.  The  first  year  Thutmes  III.  exercised  his  kingly 
power  bears  date  year  ISA  A rock-tablet  at  Wady  Magbarah 
shows  Thutmes  III.  and  Hatasou  as  joint  rulers ; it  bears  date 
the  year  16.  f Another  rock-inscription,  dated  year  25,  in 
Sabut-el-Khaden,  mentions  Thutmes  as  ruling  alone.  J By 
referring  to  the  table  it  will  be  seen  I have  commenced  to  count 
the  years  of  Hatasou  at  b.c.  1333,  causing  her  first  year  to  cor- 
respond with  the  last  year  of  Thutmes  II.  This  will  make  her 
sixteenth  year  begin  with  the  twenty-fourth  year,  reckoned 
from  the  first  year  of  Thutmes  II.,  and  which  is  also  the  twenty- 
fourth  year  of  Thutmes  III.  on  the  hypothesis  that  Thutmes 
III.  assumed  the  years  of  his  elder  brother  and  sister.  If  the 
reign  of  Hatasou  terminated  in  this  year,  the  sixteenth,  then 
Thutmes  III.  will  reign  alone  in  year  25,  agreeably  to  the  monu- 
ments. I could  have  followed  Thutmes  II.’s  ninth  year  with 
the  first  year  of  Hatasou ; this  would  cause  her  sixteenth  year 
to  correspond  with  the  twenty-fifth  of  Thutmes  III.,  and  her 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  314. 
Eng.  trans. 
t Ibid. 


% Ibid.,  p.  405. 


72 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


reign,  coming  to  an  end  in  this  year,  will  still  allow  Thutmes  to 
reign  alone  in  his  twenty-fifth  year.  But,  for  a reason  which  I 
am  about  to  give,  it  seemed  better  that  her  sixteenth  year  should 
begin  in  b.c.  1318.  Queen  Hatasou  had  begun  in  the  previous 
year,  the  year  15,  an  extraordinary  work.  On  the  base  of  an 
obelisk  of  the  temple  at  Karnak  an  inscription  bears  the  date 
year  16,  and  the  information  that  the  obelisk  had  been  quar- 
ried, cut,  and  raised  to  its  place  in  the  short  space  of  seven 
months. 

This  inscription  has  been  used  to  show  that  the  regal  years 
did  not  commence  with  the  1st  of  Thoth,  but  between  the 
months  Mechir  and  Mesori.  To  give  this  turn  to  the  inscrip- 
tion it  is  read  to  mean  that  the  seven  months  were  calculated 
“ from  the  first  day  of  Mechir  of  the  fifteenth  year  of  her  reign 
to  the  last  of  Mesori  of  the  following  sixteenth  year.”  This  por- 
tion of  the  inscription,  as  rendered  into  English  from  the  trans- 
lation of  P.  Le  Page  Renouf,  is  as  follows : “ 8.  . . . My  majesty 
began  to  work  at  this  in  the  fifteenth  year,  and  the  first  day  of 
Mechir  till  the  sixteenth  year  and  the  last  day  of  Mesori,  mak- 
ing seven  months  since  the  beginning  of  it  in  the  mountain.”* 
An  entirely  different  view  is  suggested  by  this  rendering.  The 
year  16  placed  at  the  head  of  the  inscription  is  that  following 
the  completion  of  the  obelisk.  The  work  began  in  the  year  15, 
1st  of  Mechir,  and  lasted  to  the  end  of  that  year,  just  seven 
months.  The  five  intercalary  days  belong  to  neither  month 
nor  year,  consequently  the  date  is  put  year  16,  because  the 
obelisk  was  completed  at  its  advent.  The  difference  between 
these  two  views  is  to  understand  the  work  to  last  either  to  the  end 
of  Mesori  “ till  the  sixteenth  year,”  or  to  the  end  of  Mesori  “ of 
the  following  sixteenth  year.”  In  order  to  carry  out  the  latter 
view,  Egyptologists  are  forced  to  call  these  regnal  years,  and  to 
begin  the  sixteenth  year  between  the  months  Mechir  and 
Mesori.  In  a note  appended  to  the  English  version  of  Renouf ’s 
translation  occurs,  u The  years  of  a king  count  not  from  1st  of 
Thoth,  but  from  the  day  of  his  coronation.” 

It  is  natural  to  look  for  some  explanation  of  the  extraordinary 
haste  used  in  the  erection  of  this  obelisk. 


* “ Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  xii.  127. 


EGYPTIAN  CTTRONOEOGTOA I . EPOCHS. 


73 


The  inference  is  that  either  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth 
vague  year,  counting  the  year  from  the  1st  of  Thoth,  or  within 
the  sixteenth  regnal  year  on  the  1st  of  Thoth,  some  astronomical 
event  was  to  happen  for  the  celebration  of  which  the  completion 
of  this  obelisk  was  hastened.  That  the  obelisk,  in  connection 
with  its  companion,  which  stood  on  the  other  side  of  the  passage- 
way which  ran  through  the  middle  of  the  Iiall  of  the  Osiride 
Figures  of  the  temple  at  Karnak,  served  some  astronomical 
purpose  may  be  learned  from  the  inscription  ; it  is  teeming  with 
allusions  of  this  kind  : 

“She  hath  made  this  as  a monument  to  her  father  Amon 
....  and  hath  made  for  him  two  great  obelisks  of  hard  granite 
of  the  South.” 

“ The  sun’s  disk  shines  between  them,  as  when  it  rises  from 
the  horizon  of  Heaven.” 

“I  have  entered  into  his  designs;  I have  not  neglected  the 
business  of  the  Universal  Lord  ; I have,  on  the  contrary,  applied 
myself  to  it,  for  I know  that  Thebes  is  a heaven  upon  earth,  it 
is  the  august  staircase  of  the  beginning  of  time,  it  is  the  ut’at  of 
the  Universal  Lord,  his  heart’s  throne,  which  sustains  his  glories 
and  holds  within  it  all  who  accompany  him.” 

(Note. — “ The  ut’at  of  the  sun  was  said  to  be  complete  or  full  when  one 
of  the  vertical  points  of  his  yearly  course  was  reached.”) 

“ I make  this  known  to  the  Hamemet  who  will  live  in  the 
double  period,  and  whose  hearts  will  inquire  after  this  monu- 
ment which  I have  made  for  my  father.” 

(Note. — “ Henti,  a period  of  a hundred  and  twenty  years;  here  ‘the 
time  to  come.’  ”) 

“ I rule  over  the  land  like  the  son  of  Isis,  I am  victorious  like 
the  son  of  Nut.  The  Sun-god  Ra  reposes  in  the  Sekti  boat,  he 
rests  in  the  Atet  boat,  he  consorts  with  his  two  mothers,  the 
Uigeus  goddesses,  in  the  divine  ship ; the  earth  is  fixed,  the 
heaven  is  made  stable.” 

(Note. — “ The  sekti  is  the  morning  boat  of  the  Sun-god,  atet  the  evening 
boat.”) 

“ He  hath  made  my  bounds  as  far  as  the  limits  of  heaven  ; the 
course  of  the  sun’s  disk  is  at  my  service ; he  hath  given  it  to  her 
who  is  before  him.”  According  to  the  foregoing  table  the  year 

7 


74 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


16  of  Hatasou  fell  in  b.c.  1318,  and  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  this  year 
concurred  with  July  16,  which  was  not  only  the  day  of  the  full 
moon,  but  also  that  of  the  heliacal  rising  of  the  Dog-star.  The 
obelisk  was  finished  on  the  last  day  of  Mesori,  five  days  before 
the  rising  of  the  star.  There  is  a sufficient  reason  for  the  haste 
in  the  erection  of  the  monument,  if  it  is  understood  that  these 
monuments  were  connected  with  the  practical  astronomy  of  the 
Egyptians. 

III.  Dr.  Brugsch  remarks  on  the  fifty-three  years  plus  given 
to  Thutmes  III.  in  the  inscription  of  the  Adon  Amenemheb, 
these  “including  the  years  of  the  reign  of  his  sister,  whose  sole 
reign  appeared  to  him  unjust  and  illegal.  With  this  length  of 
reign  the  Manethonian  account  of  twelve  years  for  the  double 
reign  of  the  two  together,  and  twenty-six  for  his  reign  alone, 
in  no  ivay  agrees.  There  must  be  a wrong  mark  inserted  in  the 
mutilated  copies  of  the  Manethonian  rows  of  figures.”  * 

In  the  following  table  of  the  first  nine  reigns  of  the  eighteenth 
dynasty  I have  arranged  the  three  copyists  of  Manetho  with  the 
table  of  Abydos.  To  Josephus  I have  given  two  sets  of  years. 
The  first  contains  years  and  months,  and  the  second  only  years. 

In  the  first  set  the  months  by  themselves  sum  up  sixty-two, 
which  is  equal  to  five  years  and  two  months.  These  five  years 
are  in  the  second  set  added  by  the  simple  rule  adopted  mainl}* 
by  Africanus  and  Eusebius,  and  the  result  shows  that  the  three 
lists  of  the  copyists  are  to  all  intents  and  purposes  identical. 

Table  of  the  First  Nine  Years  of  the  Eighteenth  Dynasty. 

Monuments.  Copyists  of  Manetho. 


Table  of  Abydos. 

Josephus. 

Africanus. 

Eusebius. 

1.  Aahmes. 

Tethmosis  . . 

. 25.  4 -25 

Amos 

0 

Amosis  .... 

. 25 

2.  Amenhotep  I. 

Chebron  . . 

. 13  -13 

Chebros  . . . , 

. 13 

Chebron  .... 

.13 

3.  Thutmes  I. 

Amenophis  . 

. 20.  7 -21 

Ameuophthis 

.24 

Amophis.  . . . 

.21 

4.  Thutmes  II. 

Amesses  . . . 

. 21.  9 -21 

Amersis  . . . , 

.22 

(Omitted.) 

5.  Thutmes  III. 

Mephres  . . . 

. 12.  9 -13 

Misaphris  . . . 

. 13 

Miphris  .... 

. 12 

G.  Amenhotep  II. 

Mephramutlio- 

Misphragmatho 

Misphragmutho- 

sis 

. 25.10  -26 

sis 

. 26 

sis 

. 26 

7.  Thutmes  IV. 

Tethmosis  . . . 

. 9.  8 -9 

Tuthmosis  . . 

. 9 

Tuthmosis  . . . 

. 9 

8.  Amenhotep  III.  Amenophis  . . 

. 30.10  -31 

Amenophis  . . 

. 31 

Amenophis  . . 

.31 

9.  Horemhib. 

Orus 

. 36.  5 -37 

Horus 

. 37 

Orus 

196.2-196 

175 

174 

* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  316. 
Eng.  trans. 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


75 


It  will  be  seen  that  the  copyists  of  Manetho  do  not  follow  the 
same  order  of  reigns  as  found  in  the  table  of  Abydos ; some  are 
transposed,  and  the  identity  of  others  obscured,  by  a corruption 
or  misstatement  of  the  names  of  the  kings.  The  lists  of  Afri- 
canus  and  Eusebius  agree  with  that  of  Abydos  for  the  first  and 
the  seventh,  eighth,  and  last  king.  The  intervening  reigns 
should  agree.  The  second  and  third  kings  seem  to  be  trans- 
posed by  the  copyists. 

The  list  of  Abydos  omits  Hatasou,  who  is  given  in  the  lists  of 
Josephus  and  Africanus  as  Amesses  or  Amersis,  who,  according 
to  Josephus,  was  the  sister  of  Amenophis.  Eusebius  omits  the 
woman-king.  The  list  of  Josephus  sums  up  one  hundred  and 
ninety-six  years  and  two  months,  or  one  hundred  and  ninety- 
six  years ; that  of  Africanus  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  years  ; 
and  that  of  Eusebius  one  hundred  and  seventy-four  years. 
While  Africanus  and  Eusebius  are  within  one  year  of  each 
other’s  total,  they  differ  considerably  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
dynasty.  Africanus  omits  the  years  of  Amos,  who,  according 
to  Eusebius,  reigned  twenty-five  years,  and  which  is  probably 
correct,  because  Aahmes’s  twenty-second  year  is  found  on  the 
monuments,  but  Eusebius  omits  the  years  of  Amersis,  who, 
according  to  Africanus,  reigned  twenty -two  years;  this  lessens 
the  excess  of  Eusebius  over  Africanus  to  three  years  (25-22)  ; 
but  then  Africanus  gives  the  third  reign  as  twenty-four  years 
to  Eusebius’s  twenty-one  years,  which  equalizes  the  two  lists 
down  to  the  reign  of  Misaphris.  Misaphris,  according  to  Afri- 
canus, reigned  thirteen  years,  and  according  to  Eusebius  twelve. 
The  remainder  of  the  reigns  agree  in  both  lists,  with  the  result 
that  the  total  of  Africanus  is  one  year  more  than  Eusebius. 
The  twenty-one  plus  years  which  Josephus’s  list  exceeds  the 
other  two  are  the  years  of  Amesses  omitted  by  Eusebius,  and 
which  number  Africanus  omitted  by  leaving  out  Amos’s  twenty- 
five  years  and  raising  the  third  reign  from  twenty-one  years  to 
twenty-four.  It  is  clear  that  as  the  comparison  is  between  suc- 
cessive reigns  in  the  lists,  that  the  insertion  of  Amesses  or 
Amersis  in  the  lists  of  Africanus  and  Josephus  must  throw  the 
remaining  reigns  one  place  lower  in  the  comparison  between 
these  and  that  of  Abydos.  But  these  lists  all  agree  at  the  end ; 
hence  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  copyists,  if  we  follow  the 


76 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


table  of  Abydos,  have  omitted  a reign  in  order  to  equalize  the 
number.  This  appears  to  have  been  the  reign  of  Amenhotep 
II.,  who  succeeded  Thutmes  III.,  as  the  monuments  abundantly 
testify.  If  this  is  the  case,  then  the  reigns  of  Amesses,  Mephres, 
and  Mephramuthosis  of  Josephus,  and  the  corresponding  ones 
of  Africanus  and  Eusebius  must  stand  for  the  two  in  the  table 
of  Abydos,  Thutmes  II.  and  Thutmes  III.  The  three  of 
Josephus  reign  sixty  years,  according  to  Africanus  sixty-one 
years,  and  the  two  of  Eusebius  only  thirty-eight  years. 
According  to  the  hypothesis  I am  advocating,  Thutmes  III. 
claimed  all  these  years  as  his  own,  but  the  total  of  Josephus  is 
six  years  more  than  fifty-four,  and  that  of  Africanus  is  seven 
years  more.  The  difference  between  Josephus  and  Africanus  is 
caused  by  the  way  the  months  are  added  as  years  in  the  second 
set  of  years.  I have  given  Amesses  twenty-one  to  Africanus’s 
twenty-two  years.  In  the  table  which  I have  given  of  Thut- 
mes III.’s  reign,  Hatasou  is  made  to  reign  fifteen  years  after 
Thutmes  II.,  not  counting  her  first  year,  which  overlapped  the 
last  year  of  that  king.  If  in  the  list  of  Josephus  we  insert,  in 
the  place  of  the  twenty-one  years  given  to  Amesses,  the  fifteen 
years  of  Hatasou,  the  total  of  the  three  will  be  fifty-four  years 
(15  — (-  13  — (-  26).  This  I take  to  be  the  nearest  approach  which 
can  be  made  from  these  lists  to  the  fifty-four  years  in  which 
Thutmes  III.  reigned.  It  is  clear  they  are,  as  they  stand  in  the 
copyists,  inconsistent  with  the  monuments,  both  as  to  the  per- 
sonality of  the  sovereigns  and  the  years  of  Thutmes  III. 

IY.  On  the  walls  of  the  temple  at  Karnak  are  chiselled  the 
records  of  the  campaigns  and  victories  of  Thutmes  III.  I 
propose  to  make  use  of  certain  of  these  to  confirm  the  date  of 
the  winter  solstice  in  his  reign,  or  rather  to  show  that  there  is 
a perfect  consistency  between  the  dates  belonging  to  his  cam- 
paigns and  the  seasons  of  the  year  which  are  described  in  con- 
nection with  them,  and  the  date  of  the  winter  solstice  already 
determined. 

In  the  twenty-second  year,  in  the  month  of  Pharmuthi,  the 
king  was  in  the  fortress  of  Zalu  on  his  first  campaign. 

In  the  year  23,  4th  of  Pachons,  the  day  of  his  accession  to  the 
throne,  the  king  was  in  Gaza.  The  king  left  Gaza  on  the  next 
day,  the  5th  of  Pachons. 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGIC  A I,  EPOCHS. 


77 


In  the  year  23,  16th  of  Pachons,  at  Ihem,  a council  of  war 
was  held,  and  Thutmes  informs  his  followers  that  the  King  of 
Kadesh  and  his  allies  were  in  the  town  of  Makitha  awaiting 
their  approach  in  order  to  give  them  battle.  They  decided  in 
this  council  that  the  most  advantageous  approach  to  Makitha 
was  by  the  road  of  Aluna. 

In  the  year  23,  on  the  19th  of  Pachons,  three  days  after  the 
council  of  war,  the  king’s  tent  was  pitched  at  Aluna.  The  next 
day  the  Egyptian  army  arrived  on  the  field  of  battle,  pitched 
their  tents,  and  prepared  for  the  contest. 

“ In  the  year  21,  on  the  21st  of  Pachons,  on  the  feast  of  the 
new  moon,  which  is  the  anniversary  of  the  coronation  of  the 
king,  in  the  early  morning,  it  was  ordered  to  all  the  warriors 
that  they  should  open.”*  The  battle  was  fought  on  this  day, 
resulting  in  the  victory  of  Thutmes  III.  In  the  last  date 
quoted,  “in  the  year  21,  on  the  21st  of  Pachons,”  the  21st  of 
Pachons  is  connected  with  the  other  dates  of  this  month.  The 
change  from  year  23  to  year  21,  if  there  is  no  error  in  the  print, 
must  be  explained  by  another  and  different  reckoning  of  years. 
Dr.  S.  Birch  translates  this  date,  “ . . . . Moreover,  on  the  22d 
day  of  the  month  Mesori.”  But  Dr.  Brugsch’s  translation  is 
in  accordance  with  the  proper  season  of  the  year;  that  of  Dr. 
Birch  puts  the  date  three  months  later,  at  or  about  the  summer 
solstice,  at  which  time  Palestine  is  burned  and  parched  by  the 
intense  heat  of  midsummer,  and  when  only  on  the  hills  would 
there  have  been  any  harvest  for  the  king’s  troops  to  gather.  In 
the  catalogue  of  booty  obtained  after  this  battle  is  the  follow- 
ing: 

“Account  of  the  harvest  which  the  king  reaped  from  the 
fields  of  the  town  of  Megiddo:  280,000  ( xx ) measures  of  corn, 
besides  that  which  was  destroyed  in  gathering  it  in  by  the 
soldiers  of  the  king.”f  With  the  winter  solstice  on  the  30th  of 
Mechir,  earlier  or  later  as  the  case  may  be,  within  the  limits  of 
Thutmes’s  reign,  the  vernal  equinox  will  be  on  the  29th  of 
Pachons,  earlier  or  later,  according  to  circumstances.  The 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  pp.  320-324. 
Eng.  trans. 
f Ibid.,  p.  327. 


7* 


78 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


battle  took  place  on  the  21st  of  Pachons,  at  or  near  the  vernal 
equinox,  which  is  the  beginning  of  harvest  in  Palestine.  Climate 
and  the  season  of  the  year  were  taken  into  account  as  affecting 
the  proper  time  to  engage  in  a campaign.  Such  a custom  is 
noticed  in  the  Bible.  “And  it  came  to  pass,  after  the  year  was 
expired,  at  the  time  when  kings  go  forth  to  battle”  (2d  Samuel, 
xi.  1).  These  times  will  be  regulated  by  the  locality  of  the  cam- 
paign, its  object,  etc.  Active  operations  in  some  cases  will  be 
suspended,  because  it  is  necessary  for  the  army  to  go  into  winter- 
quarters.  The  matter  of  forage  for  the  horses  and  cattle  must 
be  thought  of.  As  most  of  the  expeditions  in  ancient  times 
were  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  tribute  or  plunder,  the  cam- 
paign is  so  timed  as  to  find  the  vanquished  people  well  supplied 
with  the  means  necessary  to  satisfy  the  wants  of  the  conquerors. 
Other  inscriptions  of  this  king  are  to  the  same  effect.  One  of 
the  year  29  is  as  follows : 

“Then  went  the  king  through  the  whole  land  of  Zahi. 

“ Their  trees  were  full  of  fruit,  and  their  wine  was  found 
stored  in  cellars  as  well  as  in  skins.  Their  wheat  lay  on  the 
floor  ready  to  be  threshed.  It  was  more  than  the  sand  of  the 
sea-shore.  Tbe  soldiers  took  possession  of  all  these  things.”* 

For  Palestine  the  best  time  for  a foray  of  this  kind  would  be 
from  the  vernal  equinox  to  the  middle  of  May. 

For  expeditions  to  the  south  into  Nubia  the  winter  from 
November  to  February  will  be  the  most  suitable.  This  in  the 
time  of  Thutmes  III.  will  include  Mechir,  Phamenoth,  and 
Pharmuthi.  A well-known  inscription  of  this  records  the  defeat 
of  the  mountaineers  of  Nubia  on  the  21st  of  Pharmuthi. 

The  following  campaigns  of  Egyptian  kings  show  that  in  a 
general  way  they  kept  pace  with  the  advance  of  the  tropical  year 
in  the  vague.  These  kings  all  reigned  after  Thutmes  III.  in  the 
order  given,  but  the  last  two  are  separated  from  Thutmes  III. 
and  his  successor  by  over  two  hundred  years. 

It  will  be  found  that  expeditions  into  Palestine  which  are 
made  in  the  time  of  the  first  two  kings  in  the  month  Pachons 
occur  in  the  time  of  Rameses  II.  in  the  month  Epiphi.  The 


* ii  Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  330.  Eng. 
trans. 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGICAL  EPOCHS. 


79 


vernal  equinox  has  left  Pachons,  passed  through  Payni,  and  is 
then  in  the  month  Epiphi.  If  we  put  the  advance  at  about  two 
months,  the  interval  is  about  two  hundred  and  forty  years, 
which  agrees  generally  with  the  number  of  years  between  these 
two  sets  of  kings. 

Thutmes  III. — First  campaign  against  Upper  Ruthen  (Pales- 
tine). Date,  year  23,  21st  of  Pachons,  the  battle  of  Megiddo. 

Amenhotep  II.,  the  successor  of  Thutmes  III. — First  cam- 
paign against  Upper  Ruthen.  Dates  of  capture  of  towns : (1) 
26th  of  Pachons;  (2)  10th  of  Payni;  (3)  20th  of  Payni. 

Rameses  II. — Second  campaign  in  land  of  Zahi  (Palestine). 
Date,  year  5,  and  9th  of  Epiphi.* 

Mineptah,  successor  to  Rameses  II. — Battle  of  Prosopis  (victory 
over  the  Lybians  in  the  western  part  of  the  Delta).  Date,  year 
5,  3d  of  Epiphi. 

Regarding  the  date  “year  21”  of  the  battle  of  Megiddo,  Dr. 
Brugscb,  in  writing  of  the  same  in  other  places,  uses  the  year  23. 
The  connection  shows  that  the  year  23  is  right. 

Turning  to  the  table  I have  made  of  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III., 
it  will  be  found  that  the  year  23  of  the  jubilee  of  the  vernal 
equinox  falls  in  the  year  b.c.  1315.  In  this  year  the  1st  of  Thoth 
falls  on  the  15th  of  July,  and  the  21st  of  Pachons  on  the  1st  of 
April,  which  was  also  the  day  of  the  new  moon.  This  is  cer- 
tainly to  the  point ; year  23  has  new  moon  on  the  21st  of  Pa- 
chons, which  corresponded  to  the  1st  of  April,  b.c.  1315.  This  is 
the  date  of  the  battle  of  Megiddo,  fought,  according  to  the  in- 
scription, on  the  day  of  the  feast  of  the  new  moon  and  the  21st 
of  Pachons. 

Further,  what  is  also  remarkable  is  that  in  b.c.  1336  the  new 
moon  was  on  the  1st  of  Thoth  equal  to  July  20,  and  counting 
from  this  point  as  an  epoch,  the  21st  vague  year  began  in  b.c. 
1316,  and  included  the  month  of  Pachons  in  b.c.  1315.  Would 
it  be  rash  to  conclude  from  this  that  the  battle  of  Megiddo  was 
fought  in  the  year  21,  which  was  the  current  vague  year  of  an 
Apis  cycle,  which  began  with  the  new  moon  on  the  1st  of  Thoth, 
b.c.  1336,  because  from  the  character  of  the  Egyptian  vague,  its 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xiv.  p.  50.  Eng. 
trans. 


80 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


commencement  being  at  midnight,  the  lunar  cycles  connected 
with  it  should  also  have  the  same  epoch,  which  will  be  when 
the  moon  rises  at  her  third  quarter?  If  the  Apis  cycle,  instead 
of  being  commenced  on  the  1st  of  Thoth,  began  on  the  1st  of 
Pliamenoth  of  the  preceding  vague  year,  with  the  moon  at  her 
third  quarter,  then  the  new  moon  will  fall  on  the  9th  of  Phame- 
noth,  and  also  on  the  1st  of  the  following  vague  year, — that  is, 
the  1st  of  Thoth  in  b.c.  1336.  The  year  21  of  such  a cycle  will 
end  with  Mechir,  and  the  21st  of  Pachons  in  year  b.c.  1315,  in- 
stead of  falling  in  the  twenty-first  year,  will  fall  in  the  twenty- 
second  year  of  the  Apis  cycle.  The  twenty-second  year,  it  will 
be  remembered,  began  the  account  of  this  campaign.  Dr. 
Brugsch  writes  as  follows  about  this  date : “ Agreeing  with  this” 
(that  is,  the  theory  that  the  regnal  years  did  not  begin  with  the 
1st  of  Thoth),  “ the  great  tablet  of  Victory  of  Karnak  announces 
that  the  same  king,  in  the  twenty-second  year  of  his  reign,  in 
the  month  Pharmuthi  (the  day  of  the  month  is  unfortunately 
destroyed),  left  the  Egyptian  frontier  to  arrive  at  Gaza  a few 
days  later,  in  the  twenty-third  year,  on  the  day  of  his  corona- 
tion, the  4th  of  Pachons.  Here  there  can  be  neither  a wrong 
reading  nor  error.”* 

Dr.  Brugsch’s  idea  is  that  Thutmes  III.’s  first  regnal  year 
began  on  the  4th  of  Pachons;  all  his  years  are  reckoned  from 
this  date,  hence  all  dates  before  the  4th  of  Pachons  fall  in  a 
previous  year.  This  does  not  contradict;  but  as  all  these  dates 
fell  in  the  same  vague  year,  I have  only  suggested  a certain 
mode  of  counting  these  years  by  which  the  date  of  the  battle  of 
Megiddo  fell  in  a twenty-second  or  twenty-first  year.  This  date 
— the  4th  of  Pachons — of  his  accession  to  the  throne,  compared 
with  the  one  we  have  just  been  considering,  which  had  the  new 
moon  on  the  21st  of  Pachons,  “ which  is  the  anniversary  of  the 
coronation  of  the  king,”  has  suggested  to  me  the  conjecture 
that  the  4th  of  Pachons  was  also  a day  of  the  new  moon. 

I find  in  b.c.  1319  the  new  moon  was  on  the  4th  of  Pachons, 
concurring  with  March  16.  By  reference  to  the  table  of  the 
l’eign  of  Thutmes  III.  it  will  be  found  that  the  fourteenth  year 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  315.  Eng. 
trans. 


EPOCHS  OF  KINGS  PRECEDING  THUTMES  III. 


81 


of  Hatasou,  which  in  this  instance  I have  reckoned  from  1st  of 
Thoth,  fell  in  with  b.c.  1320  and  1319.  The  following  year  is 
the  one  in  which  Thutmes  III.’s  first  exercise  of  kingly  power 
bears  date  the  27th  of  the  month  Pachons  of  the  fifteenth  year. 
Tho  conclusion  is  that  Thutmes  III.’s  coronation  was  on  the  4th 
of  Pachons,  b.c.  1319,  concurring  with  March  16,  and  day  of  new 
moon.  This  was  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Ilatasou,  reckoning 
her  years  from  the  1st  of  Thoth,  or  the  fifteenth  year,  reckoning 
from  between  Mechir  and  Pachons,  and  at  the  most  but  a few ' 
days  over  a year  from  the  earliest  known  date  of  Thutmes  III.’s 
assumption  of  power. 

The  following  are  the  dates  established  in  the  reign  of  Thut- 
mes III. : 

b.c.  1341. — The  first  year  of  his  assumed  reign. 
b.c.  1319. — His  accession  to  the  throne  on  the  4th  of  Pachons, 
concurrent  with  the  16th  of  March. 

b.c.  1318. — The  heliacal  rise  of  Sirius  on  the  1st  of  Thoth, 
concurrent  with  July  16. 

b.c.  1315. — The  battle  of  Makitlia  (Megiddo)  fought  on  the  21st 
of  Pachons,  which  concurred  with  April  1. 

b.c.  1288. — The  foundation  of  a temple  at  Thebes  on  the  day 
of  the  winter  solstice,  Mechir  30,  concurrent  with  January  3. 

b.c.  1287. — His  death  on  the  30th  of  Pbamenoth,  which  coin- 
cided with  February  2,  just  one  year  and  thirty  days  after  the 
laying  of  the  foundation-stone  of  the  temple  at  Thebes. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

ESTIMATED  EPOCHS  OF  KINGS  PRECEDING  THUTMES  III.  IN  THE 
EIGHTEENTH  DYNASTY. 

The  epochs  of  kings  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  reigning 
before  Thutmes  III.,  are  estimated  from  the  life  of  Pen  Hukheb. 
An  inscription  in  the  tomb  of  the  warrior  contains  the  follow- 
ing : “ My  early  life  passed  in  the  time  of  the  defunct  King 

Aahmes,  and  of  the  defunct  King  Amenhotep  I.,  and  the  defunct 
King  Thutmes  I.,  and  the  defunct  King  Thutmes  II.,  and  was 


82 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


finished  in  the  time  of  Thutmes  III.  May  he  live  long.”*  We 
have  here  the  case  of  a man  who  lived  to  “a  fortunate  old  age,” 
and  who  was  probably  born  before  the  reign  of  King  Aahmes, 
and  who  finished  his  life  in  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.  Pen 
Nukheb  also  tells  us,  “[I  served]  King  Aahmes  in  a hand-to- 
hand  combat.  I gained  for  him  in  the  land  of  Zahi  ten  hands.” 
Pen  Nukheb  must  have  been  old  enough  in  the  reign  of  Aahmes 
to  take  part  in  a foreign  war.  Aahmes,  according  to  the  copy- 
ists of  Manetho,  reigned  twenty-five  years.  His  twenty-second 
year  is  found  on  the  monuments,  therefore  twenty-five  years  for 
the  length  of  his  reign  is  retained.  I estimate  the  age  of 
Pen  Nukheb  to  have  been  about  thirty  years  when  Amenhotep 
ascended  the  throne,  and  allowing  fifteen  years  to  each  of  the 
following  reigns,  the  result  is: 

Age  of  Pen  Nukheb  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Amen- 


hotep   0-30  years. 

His  age  at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Thutmes  1 16-45  “ 

“ “ “ “ Thutmes  II.  . . . 30-60  “ 

“ “ “ “ Thutmes  III.  . . .45-75  “ 

Duration  of  his  life  in  the  reign  of  Thutmes  III.  (15)  . . . 60-90  “ 


From  this  may  be  estimated  the  epochs  of  the  following  kings, 
calculating  them  from  the  epoch  of  Thutmes  III.,  formerly 
obtained  b.c.  1341 : 

Aahmes,  b.c.  1396  (25  years). 

Amenhotep,  “ 1371  (15  “ ). 

Thutmes  I.,  “ 1356  (15  “ ). 


CHAPTER  Y 1 1 1. 

ESTIMATE  OF  THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  THUTMES  III.  AND  RAMESES  II. 

The  epoch  of  Amenhotep  II.,  the  successor  of  Thutmes  III., 
is  fixed  by  that  of  the  latter  king.  It  was  in  b.c.  1287.  In 
estimating  the  epochs  of  the  kings  of  the  table  of  Abydos  for 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  xiii.  p.  274.  Eng. 
trans. 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  THUTMES  III.  AND  RAMESES  II.  83 

the  period  between  Thutmes  III.  and  Rameses  II.,  the  epoch 
of  Thutmes  III.,  already  established,  b.c.  1341,  is  taken  as 
the  starting-point,  and  all  the  reigns  are  reckoned  at  forty 
years  each.  This  will  give  Amenhotep  II.  an  estimated  epoch 
fourteen  years  higher  than  his  true  one,  because  Thutmes 
III.  reigned  fifty-four  years.  The  arrangement  of  the  table  of 
Abydos  served  some  chronological  purpose,  and  the  number  of 
kings  selected  (supposing  each  king  represented  the  same  num- 
ber of  years)  depended  upon  the  period  covered  by  the  table. 
If  the  list  was  complete  for  all  the  kings,  the  average  for  each 
king  will  be  the  years  of  the  period  divided  by  the  number  of 
kings.  If  the  average  was  a round  number,  it  determines  the 
number  of  selected  kings.  Dr.  Brugsch  adopts  for  the  table  of 
Abydos  the  generation  of  thirty-three  and  one-third  years.  He 
interpolates  between  the  eighteenth  and  twelfth  dynasties  five 
hundred  and  sixty-six  years,  during  which  sixteen  generations  of 
Hycsos  kings  reign  ; he  counts  the  reigns  of  Thutmes  II.  and  Thut- 
mes III.  as  one  generation,  and  inserts  one  generation  of  heretic 
kings  between  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties.  He 
thus  obtains  three  thousand  one  hundred  years  for  the  kings 
of  this  table.  If  he  had  allowed  the  average  of  forty  years  to 
each  king,  he  would  have  obtained  nearly  the  samo  result  with- 
out recourse  to  interpolations,  three  thousand  and  eighty  years. 
The  period  of  three  thousand  and  eighty  years  is  based  upon 
the  sidereal  year,  and  came  to  an  end  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  II. 
Some  heliacal  rising  of  Sirius  probably  closed  the  period.  This 
I suspect  to  be  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Brugsch,  because  he  estimates 
the  epoch  of  Rameses  II.  at  b.c.  1333,  and  it  is  well  known  that 
the  epoch  of  the  Sothic  cycle  is  usually  put  at  b.c.  1322.  If  the 
period  of  three  thousand  and  eighty  years  ends  in  b.c.  1322,  it 
began  in  b.c.  4401,  and  Dr.  Brugsch  places  the  epoch  of  Mena, 
the  first  king,  in  b.c.  4400,  using  the  table  of  Abydos  with  the 
changes  already  noticed,  counting  three  generations  to  the 
century. 


Epochs  Estimated  by  the  Average  of  Forty  Years. 


70  b.c.  1341,  Thutmes  III.  . . 

. 0 

74  b.c.  1181,  Horemhib  . . 

. 160 

71  “ 

1301,  Amenhotep  II.  . 

. 40 

75  “ 

1141,  Ramessu  I.  . . 

. 200 

72  “ 

1261,  Thutmes  IV.  . . 

. 80 

76  “ 

1101,  Seti  I 

. 240 

73  “ 

1221,  Amenhotep  III. 

. 120 

77  “ 

1061,  Ramessu  II.  . 

. 280 

84 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


The  average  is,  of  course,  artificial,  but  the  period  is  not  so. 
The  basis  upon  which  the  artificial  system  was  raised  is  presum- 
ably sound.  Uncertainty  affects  the  intermediate  reigns,  but 
not  materially  those  at  the  extremes.  It  will  be  proven  that 
Rameses  II.  began  his  reign  in  b.c.  1057,  only  four  years  later 
than  the  epoch  produced  for  him  by  the  above  reckoning  for  the 
table  of  Abydos.  Again,  if  the  interval  between  b.c.  1319,  the 
year  in  which  Thutmes  III.  was  crowned,  and  b.c.  999,  in  which 
year  fell  the  fifty-ninth  year  of  Kameses  II.,  which  is  three 
hundred  and  twenty  years,  be  divided  among  eight  kings  of 
the  table  of  Abydos,  beginning  with  Thutmes  III.  and  ending 
with  Kameses  II.,  we  will  have  eight  periods  of  forty  years. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

KAMESES  II.  AND  THE  ERA  OF  KING  NUB. 

The  following  table  of  the  reign  of  Kameses  II.  is  given 
to  show  the  place  of  the  four  hundredth  year  of  the  era 
of  King  Nub.  The  thirty  years’  jubilee  connected  with  the 
vernal  equinox  begins  in  Kameses  II. ’s  fortieth  year.  It  and 
the  other  jubilees  of  the  thirtieth,  thirty-fourth,  and  thirty- 
seventh  years  are  designated.  The  one  of  the  fortieth  year  is 
the  key  to  the  whole  arrangement,  and  the  one  for  which  the 
hypothesis  was  advanced  that  it  concurred  in  part  with  the 
four  hundredth  year  of  King  Nub,  mentioned  on  the  memorial- 
stone  which  was  raised  in  the  reign  of  Kameses  II.,  and  which 
bore  the  date  Mesori  4.  In  the  table  I have  given  Kameses  II. 
sixty-seven  years,  because  his  sixty-seventh  year  is  found  on  the 
monuments.  Adjusting  this  reign  with  the  fortieth  year  at 
b.c.  1018,  and  extending  the  Julian  years  upward,  we  get  b.c. 
1057  for  the  first  year  of  Kameses  II.’s  reign. 

Regnal  Year  of 

Jubilee  Cycles.  Years  the  Era  of 


B.C. 

s.  s. 

A.  E. 

w.  s. 

V.  E. 

King  Nub. 

1057 

1 

26 

23 

20 

1 

361 

1056 

2 

27 

24 

21 

2 

362 

1055 

8 

28 

25 

22 

3 

363 

1054 

4 

29 

26 

23 

4 

364 

1053 

5 

1 

27 

24 

5 

365 

RAMESES 

II. 

AND 

THE 

ERA  OF  KING  NTTB. 

85 

B.C. 

Jubilee  Cycles. 
S.  S.  A.  E.  W.  S. 

V.  E. 

Regnal 

Years. 

Year  of 
the  Era  of 
King  Nub. 

1052 

6 

2 

28 

25 

6 

366 

1051 

7 

3 

29 

26 

7 

367 

1050 

8 

4 

1 

27 

8 

368 

1049 

9 

5 

2 

28 

9 

369 

1048 

10 

6 

3 

29 

10 

370 

1047 

11 

7 

4 

1 

11 

371 

1046 

12 

8 

5 

2 

12 

372 

1045 

13 

9 

6 

3 

13 

373 

1044 

14 

10 

7 

4 

14 

374 

1043 

15 

11 

8 

5 

15 

375 

1042 

16 

12 

9 

6 

16 

376 

1041 

17 

13 

10 

7 

17 

377 

1040 

18 

14 

11 

8 

18 

378 

1039 

19 

15 

12 

9 

19 

379 

1038 

20 

16 

13 

10 

20 

380 

1037 

21 

17 

14 

11 

21 

381 

1036 

22 

18 

15 

12 

22 

382 

1035 

23 

19 

16 

13 

23 

383 

1034 

24 

20 

17 

14 

24 

384 

1033 

25 

21 

18 

15 

25 

385 

1032 

26 

22 

19 

16 

26 

386 

1031 

27 

23 

20 

17 

27 

387 

1030 

28 

24 

21 

18 

28 

388 

1029 

29 

25 

22 

19 

29 

389 

1028 

1 

26 

23 

20 

30 

Jubilee  of  the  thirtieth 

390 

1027 

2 

27 

24 

21 

31 

year. 

391 

1026 

3 

28 

25 

22 

32 

392 

1025 

4 

29 

26 

23 

33 

393 

1024 

5 

1 

27 

24 

34 

Jubilee  of  the  thirty-fourth 

394 

1023 

6 

2 

28 

25 

85 

year. 

395 

1022 

7 

3 

29 

26 

36 

396 

1021 

8 

4 

1 

27 

37 

Jubilee  of  the  thirty- 

397 

1020 

9 

5 

2 

28 

38 

seventh  year. 

398 

1019 

10 

6 

3 

29 

39 

399 

1018 

11 

7 

4 

1 

40 

Jubilee  of  the  fortieth  year ; 

400 

1017 

12 

8 

5 

2 

41 

also  the  year  of  the  rais- 

401 

1016 

13 

9 

6 

3 

42 

ing  of  the  memorial  of 

402 

1015 

14 

10 

7 

4 

43 

King  Nub,  or  the  four 

403 

1014 

15 

11 

8 

5 

44 

hundredth  year  of  the  era 

404 

1013 

16 

12 

9 

6 

45 

of  that  king  began  in  this 

405 

1012 

17 

13 

10 

7 

46 

year. 

406 

1011 

18 

14 

11 

8 

47 

407 

1010 

19 

15 

12 

9 

48 

408 

8 


86 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


B.C. 

s.  s 

Jubilee  Cycles. 
. A.  E.  W.  S. 

V.  E. 

Regnal 

Years. 

Year  of 
the  Era  of 
King  Nub. 

1009 

20 

16 

13 

10 

49 

409 

1008 

21 

17 

14 

11 

50 

410 

1007 

22 

18 

15 

12 

51 

411 

1006 

23 

19 

16 

13 

52 

412 

1005 

24 

20 

17 

14 

53 

413 

1004 

25 

21 

18 

15 

54 

414 

1003 

26 

22 

19 

16 

65 

415 

1002 

27 

23 

20 

17 

56 

416 

1001 

28 

24 

21 

18 

67 

417 

1000 

29 

25 

22 

19 

58 

418 

999 

1 

26 

23 

20 

59  The  heliacal  rising 

of  419 

998 

2 

27 

24 

21 

60 

Sirius,  year  1,  23d 

of  420 

997 

3 

28 

25 

22 

61 

Athyr,  concurrent  with  421 

996 

4 

29 

26 

23 

62 

b.c.  999  and  July  18. 

422 

995 

5 

1 

27 

24 

63 

. 

423 

994 

6 

2 

28 

25 

64 

424 

993 

7 

3 

29 

26 

65 

425 

992 

8 

4 

1 

27 

66 

426 

991 

9 

5 

2 

28 

67 

427 

The  beginning  of  the  era  of  King  Nub  I place  at  the  vernal 
equinox  of  b.c.  1417.  This  will  cause  the  four  hundredth  year 
to  commence  in  b.c.  1018.  I begin  it  at  the  vernal  equinox, 
because  I found  that  the  memorial-stone  of  King  Nub  is  dated 
on  the  4th  of  Mesori  of  the  four  hundredth  year  of  this  king. 
The  4th  of  Mesori  was  at  the  vernal  equinox  in  b.c.  1018.  On 
the  hypothesis  that  this  was  the  fortieth  year  of  Rameses  II.,  I 
was  enabled  to  adjust  the  remaining  jubilees  of  Rameses  II.,  and 
to  form  a table  of  the  same,  and  to  extend  it  to  the  reign  of 
Thutmes  III. 

In  this  year,  b.c.  1417,  the  rising  of  Sirius  took  place  on  the 
15th  of  July,  concurrent  with  the  11th  of  Mesori,  which  was 
also  the  day  of  the  new  moon. 

We  meet  here  a peculiarity  of  the  sidereal  year  not  before 
noticed,  and  which  goes  to  explain  the  origin  of  the  calcula- 
tion of  the  rising  of  Sothis  by  the  one  hundredth  year  of 
the  era.*  It  is  this:  if  in  b.c.  1417  the  rising  took  place  on 


* Censorinus,  writing  a.d.  238,  says,  “For  a hundred  years  ago  from 
the  present  year  of  the  Consulships  of  Ulpius  and  Brutius  the  same  fell 
upon  the  12th  Kalends  of  August  (21st  of  July),  on  which  day  Canicular 


RAMESES  II.  AND  THE  ERA  OF  KING  NUB. 


87 


July  15,  the  day  of  the  new  moon,  then  in  b.c.  1318,  in  the 
one  hundredth  year  thereafter,  this  rising  will  take  place  on 
July  16,  and  the  day  of  the  full  moon. 

The  explanation  of  this  is  that  ninety-nine  Julian  years  are, 
on  an  average,  a little  over  ten  hours  shorter  than  twelve  hun- 
dred and  twenty-four  and  one-half  synods  of  the  moon.  If, 
as  above  stated,  the  rising  was  on  the  15th  of  July,  then,  as 
after  ninety-nine  years  the  full  moon  will  be  on  the  16th  of 
July,  this  will  be  tbe  second  day  of  the  one  hundredth  year, 
and  by  the  technical  rule  of  this  cycle  the  day  of  the  rising. 
The  advance  of  the  sidereal  year  in  the  Julian  for  ninety -nine 
years  has  an  average  of  over  fifteen  hours,  or  about  five  hours 
more  than  that  of  the  above-described  lunar  period.  This 
doctrine  of  the  one  hundredth  year  cannot  be  used  continuously 
in  the  cycle  from  the  same  era,  because  the  period  is  meas- 
ured by  terms  of  ninety -nine  years,  but  in  every  instance  the 
star  will  rise  in  the  one  hundredth  year,  counting  from  the  date 
of  its  rising  in  a year  1 of  a preceding  term  of  ninety-nine 
years. 

The  following  epochs  are  separated  one  from  the  other  by 
terms  of  ninety-nine  years.  They  show  the  advance  of  the 
new  and  full  moons  of  the  lunar  period  in  the  Julian  year, 
indicating  the  technical  rising  required  by  the  cycle : 

b.c.  1417  H.  rising  July  16,  and  day  of  new  moon. 


u 

1318 

ll 

il 

ll 

16, 

U 

full  moon. 

a 

1219 

ll 

il 

ll 

16, 

ll 

new  moon. 

il 

1120 

ll 

ll 

ll 

16, 

ll 

full  moon. 

u 

1021 

ll 

il 

ll 

16, 

It 

new  moon. 

it 

922 

ll 

ll 

It 

17, 

ll 

full  moon. 

It 

823 

ll 

It 

ll 

18, 

It 

new  moon. 

ti 

724 

ll 

It 

ll 

18, 

ll 

full  moon. 

a 

626 

ll 

ll 

ll 

18, 

It 

new  moon. 

u 

626 

ll 

ll 

It 

19, 

It 

full  moon. 

a 

427 

ll 

l l 

ll 

20, 

U 

new  moon. 

regularly  rises  in  Egypt.”  This  is  the  same  date  as  that  for  which  the  au- 
thority of  Meton  is  given  as  being  twenty-eight  days  after  the  summer  sol- 
stice of  a.d.  138.  Geminus,  writing  in  this  year  (a.d.  238),  says,  “The 
present  year  is  the  hundredth  year  of  the  solar  or  Canicular  year  but  he 
gives  July  20,  in  place  of  July  21,  for  the  date  of  the  heliacal  rising. 


88 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


B.C. 

328 

H. 

rising 

July  20,  and  day  of  full  moon. 

u 

229 

U 

<< 

11 

20, 

U 

new  moon. 

u 

130 

U 

U 

a 

21, 

U 

full  moon. 

u 

31 

u 

u 

u 

21, 

u 

new  moon. 

A.D. 

G9 

u 

u 

a 

22, 

u 

full  moon. 

u 

168 

a 

u 

u 

22, 

u 

new  moon. 

If  we  understand  that  the  technical  risings  of  the  cycle  were 
confined  to  these  dates  throughout  this  great  period,  we  can, 
perhaps,  explain  the  origin  of  the  date  July  20,  which  has  been 
connected  with  the  rising  of  Sirius. 

By  the  decree  of  Canopus  we  know  that  Sirius  rose  heliacally 
in  Egypt  in  b.c.  238.  At  this  time,  by  the  foregoing  table,  and 
the  cycle  of  twelve  hundred  and  twenty-four  and  one-half 
synods  of  the  moon,  Sirius  rose  on  the  20th  of  July.  But  it 
must  be  kept  in  mind  that  Sirius  rises  heliacally  every  year, 
and  that  during  these  periods  in  which  the  star  rose  on  the  20th 
of  July,  that  only  of  those  dates  which,  by  the  cycle  of  nine- 
teen years,  will  have  the  new  and  full  moon  return  to  them  can 
the  coincidence  of  the  new  and  full  moon  and  the  given  date  of  the 
Julian  be  predicated  for  the  rising  of  the  star.  There  is  nothing 
in  this  view  of  the  sidereal  cycle  to  contradict  what  has  been 
advocated  in  the  chapter  particularly  given  to  this  subject. 
This  is  an  entirely  different  cycle.  The  period  of  fourteen  hun- 
dred and  sixty  years  does  not  enter  into  it  without  bi’eaking 
the  series  of  ninety-nine  years  of  which  it  is  composed.  We  dis- 
cover by  it  that  if  the  rise  of  Sirius  is  confined  to  July  20,  it  does 
not  always  have  the  new  or  full  moon  on  that  date  at  its  rising, 
and  this  may  account  for  the  statement  of  Censorinus  that  the 
moon  was  not  taken  into  account.  But  the  moon  was  taken 
into  account  in  order  to  produce  a selection  of  the  date  July  20. 
If  July  20  was  adopted  as  the  proper  date  of  the  heliacal  rising 
in  a.d.  138,  for  the  reason  that  by  this  cycle  this  was  its  date  in 
b.c.  238,  it  was  done  manifestly  through  ignorance  of  how  the 
date  July  20,  in  the  first  instance,  was  obtained. 

If  a Sothic  cycle  began  July  15,  b.c.  1417,  then  the  rising  in 
b.c.  1318,  on  July  16,  was  of  the  one  hundredth  year.  Again, 
this  cycle  of  the  era  b.c.  1417  came  to  an  end  in  a.d.  44,  and  a 
second  cycle  began,  the  era  of  which  was  a.d.  44.  The  cycle 
which  began  in  b.c.  1318  came  to  an  end  in  a.d.  143,  with  the 


RAMESES  II.  AND  THE  ERA  OF  KING  NUB. 


89 


full  moon  on  the  15th  of  July,  and  this  was  the  one  hundredth 
of  the  era  of  the  cycle  which  began  in  a.d.  44,  with  new  moon 
on  the  14th  of  July.  The  cycle  which  began  in  a.d.  143,  with 
full  moon  on  the  15th  of  July,  had  for  the  beginning  of  its  one 
hundredth  year  the  15th  of  July,  a.d.  242,  in  which  year  the 
new  moon  was  on  the  15th  of  July. 

The  Heliacal  Rising  of  Sirius  in  this  Reign. — A long  inscrip- 
tion of  Rameses  II.  informs  us,  “ On  one  of  these  days,  it  was 
in  the  first  year,  on  the  23d  day  of  the  month  Athyr,  on  [his 
return  home]  after  (the  conclusion)  of  the  feast  of  the  voyage  of 
Amon  to  Thebes,  then  he  went  out,  endowed  with  power  and 
strength  by  Amon  and  by  Turn,  out  of  the  city  of  Thebes. 
They  had  assured  him  a recompense  through  never-ending  years, 
as  long  as  the  duration  of  the  existence  of  the  sun  in  heaven. 

“ He  raised  his  hand,  which  bore  the  incense-vessel,  upwards  to 
the  heavenly  orb  of  light  of  the  living  God.  The  sacrificial 
gifts  were  splendid,  they  were  received  with  satisfaction  in  all 
his  ...(?)  The  king  (now)  returned  from  the  capital  of  the 
land  of  the  South.  [As  soon  as]  the  sun  [had  risen]  the  journey 
commenced.”  The  inscription  further  tells  us  that  the  king 
visited  the  Necropolis  of  Abydos  and  found  the  temple  of  his 
father  Seti  unfinished.  After  giving  directions  for  its  comple- 
tion and  the  repairing  of  that  which  had  fallen  down,  the  king 
makes  a song  of  praise  to  his  father  Seti : “ Awake,  l’aise  thy 

face  to  heaven,  behold  the  sun,  my  father  Mineptah,  thou  who 
art  like  God.  Here  am  I who  make  thy  name  to  live.  . . . 
Thou  restest  in  the  deep  like  Osiris,  while  I rule  like  Ra  among 
men  (and  possess)  the  great  throne  of  Turn,  like  Horus,  the  son 
of  Isis,  the  guardian  of  his  father.  Beautiful  is  that  which  I 
have  done  for  thee.  Thou  enterest  on  a second  existence.”  . . . 
The  portion  to  which  attention  is  more  particularly  directed  is 
in  these  words : “ Thou  hast  entered  into  the  realm  of  heaven. 
Thou  accompaniest  the  sun-god  Ra.  Thou  art  united  with  the 
stars,  and  the  moon.  Thou  restest  in  the  deep,  like  those  who 
dwell  in  it  with  Unnofer,  the  eternal.  Thy  hands  move  the  god 
Turn  in  heaven  and  on  earth,  like  the  wandering  stars,  and  the 
fixed  stars.  Thou  remainest  in  the  forepart  of  the  bark  of  mil- 
lions. When  the  sun  rises  in  the  tabernacle  of  heaven,  thine 
eyes  behold  his  splendor.  When  Turn  (the  evening  sun)  goes 

8* 


90 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


to  rest  on  the  earth,  thou  art  in  his  train.  Thou  enterest  the 
secret  house  before  his  lord.  Thy  foot  wanders  in  the  deep. 
Thou  remainest  in  the  company  of  the  gods  of  the  under 
world.”  * The  king  is  here  speaking  in  figurative  language, 
which  has  a new  meaning  if  we  recognize  in  it  allusions  to  the 
heliacal  rising  of  Sirius,  which  happened  on  this  day. 

Sothis  rose  b.c.  1318  on  the  1st  of  Thoth.  In  b.c.  999  the  pre- 
cession of  the  star  for  three  hundred  and  nineteen  years  will  be 
eighty-one  days,  six  hours  plus ; this  will  bring  the  rising  to  the 
23d  day  of  the  month  Athyr,  the  date  mentioned  in  the  inscrip- 
tion, when,  after  he  had  “ raised  his  hand,  which  bore  the  incense- 
vessel,  upwards  to  the  heavenly  orb  of  light  of  the  living  God,” 
he  returned  from  Thebes  and  commenced  his  journey  as  soon  as 
the  sun  rose.  The  meaning  of  the  year  1 of  the  inscription  is 
found  by  reference  to  the  table  of  the  reign  of  Eameses  II., 
where  opposite  to  the  year  b.c.  999,  Eameses’s  fifty-ninth  year,  is 
found  year  1 of  the  cycle  of  the  jubilee  of  the  summer  solstice. 
This  explanation  of  the  year  1 is  necessary  in  order  to  avoid  the 
difficulty  which  arises  if  this  year  is  understood  to  have  been 
the  first  year  of  Eameses’s  reign,  for  the  inscription  implies  that 
Seti  had  been  dead  many  years.  In  this  year  began  the  third 
cycle  of  the  jubilee  of  the  summer  solstice  in  Eameses’s  reign, 
and  the  second  celebration  of  the  festival  for  this  king.  In 
b.c.  999,  Sirius  rose  on  the  18th  of  July,  concurrent  with  the 
23d  of  Athyr,  and  in  the  first  year  of  the  jubilee  cycle,  which 
began  in  this  year  at  the  summer  solstice.  This  was  also  the 
day  of  the  visible  new  moon  following  the  summer  solstice. 


CHAPTEE  X. 

THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.,  AND  THE 
CHRONOLOGY  DOWN  TO  THE  PERSIAN  INVASION. 

The  epoch  of  Takelath  II.  was  in  b.c.  846.  The  interval 
between  Eameses  II.  and  this  king  is  about  one  hundred  and 

* “ Eeypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xiv.  pp.  34-41. 
Eng.  trans. 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  91 

forty-five  years.  This  will  give  about  fourteen  years  to  each 
ten  kings.  The  priestly  dynasty  is  not  found  in  the  copies  of 
Manetho  as  a separate  one.  The  last  three  kings  of  the  twenty- 
first  dynasty  evidently  belong  to  it. 

Osochor.  Hirhor.  (Pehor.) 

Psinaches.  (Pinaches.)  Piankhi. 

Psusennes.  (Susennes.)  Pinotem  I.  or  Pisebekham  I. 

If  this  dynasty  is  allowed  a duration  of  forty  or  forty-five 
years,  and  the  successors  of  Rameses  II.  fifty-seven  years,  the 
following  epochs  are  obtained : 

Epoch  of  twenty-first  dynasty,  b.c.  934. 

Epoch  of  twenty-second  dynasty,  b.c.  889  or  894. 

THE  EPOCH  OF  TAKELATH  II.,  B.C.  846. 

There  are  two  inscriptions,  one  of  which  mentions  the  rise  of 
Sirius  on  the  1st  of  Tybi  in  an  eleventh  year,  and  the  other, 
what  is  supposed  to  be  a lunar  eclipse,  on  the  25th  of  Mesori  in 
a fifteenth  year  during  the  reign  of  Takelatli  II.  If  these  can 
be  used  to  confirm  each  other, — that  is,  if  Sirius  could  rise  on 
the  1st  of  Tybi  in  an  eleventh  year,  and  a fifteenth  year  have  a 
full  moon  on  the  25th  of  Mesori, — the  epochs  of  these  can  be 
determined,  provided  it  is  known  why  the  rise  of  Sirius  on  the 
1st  of  Tjdfi  is  especially  mentioned,  and  that  there  was  an 
eclipse  on  the  25th  of  Mesori. 

Yon  Gumpach  (“  Baby-Worlds”)  asserts  that  Sirius  rose  heli- 
acally  on  the  1st  of  Tybi  in  b.c.  832,  and  he  identifies  this  as  the 
one  of  the  eleventh  year  of  Takelath  II.  But  with  the  eleventh 
year  at  b.c.  832,  Mesori  of  the  fifteenth  year  will  fall  in  b.c.  827, 
in  which  year  a lunar  eclipse  was  impossible  on  the  25th  of 
Mesori.  Yon  Gumpach’s  endorsement  of  the  epoch  b.c.  832  is 
based  upon  a calculation  which  makes  Sirius  rise  heliacally  in 
that  year  on  the  1st  of  Tybi.  But  what  confidence  can  be  placed 
in  a calculation  of  this  kind  ? Sirius  rose  on  the  2d  of  Tybi  in 
this  year  four  minutes  earlier  than  on  the  previous  day.  Now, 
it  is  known  that  at  or  about  the  summer  solstice  in  Egypt,  when 
the  Nile  overflows  and  covers  the  land,  morning  and  evening 
mists  prevail,  owing  to  the  great  evaporation  caused  by  the 
flood  of  waters.  This  is  the  condition  prevailing  at  the  time 


92 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


Sirius  rose  in  b.c.  832,  and  it  is  manifest  that,  as  the  rising  of 
Sirius  was  an  observed  one,  the  conditions  of  an  observable  helia- 
cal rising  are  different  at  different  seasons  in  Egypt,  which  is  a 
country  of  unusually  clear  atmosphere  at  other  times.  If  the 
rising  on  the  1st  of  Tybi  before  sunrise  was  the  first  observed 
appearance  of  Sirius  after  the  star  had  passed  from  the  obscura- 
tion of  the  sun,  with  the  atmosphere  rendered  opaque  by  mists, 
the  star  must  be  farther  from  the  sun  to  be  visible  than  when 
the  medium  through  which  it  is  seen  is  more  transparent. 
Certainly  a difference  of  one  day  in  date  and  four  minutes  in 
time  in  the  rise  of  the  star  are  possible  under  the  circumstances; 
therefore  the  determination  by  modern  astronomers  of  the  time 
of  the  heliacal  rising  of  Sirius  in  Egypt  in  b.c.  832,  or  any  other 
year,  be  they  ever  so  accurate,  is  not  conclusive  as  to  the  time 
of  the  actual  observation  intended  by  an  inscription.  Mr. 
Cooper,  whom  Yon  Gumpach  cites  in  respect  to  this  rising  of 
Sirius,  says,  “ The  inscription  is  not  positively  known  to  connect 
the  1st  of  Tybi  with  the  heliacal  rising”  ( Athenceum , May  11, 
1861).  In  connection  with  the  Sothic  cycle,  I have  shown  that 
Sirius  rose  in  b.c.  1318  on  the  1st  of  Thoth  (July  16),  and  day 
of  the  full  moon ; the  second  season  of  the  great  year  began 
in  b.c.  778,  on  the  16th  of  Tybi  (July  16),  and  day  of  the 
full  moon ; and  the  third  season  began  in  b.c.  238,  on  the 
1st  of  Payni  (July  16),  and  day  of  the  full  moon.  To  show 
the  correctness  of  the  calculation  of  Yon  Gumpach,  between 
b.c.  778  and  b.c.  832  are  fifty-four  years,  or  an  advance  of  thirteen 
days,  twenty  hours  for  the  star,  which  will  bring  it  relatively  to 
the  15th  of  Tybi ; and  as  the  date  16th  of  Tybi  was  only  chosen 
because  it  was  the  day  of  the  full  moon,  the  two  calculations  are 
harmonious.  To  have  any  uniform  rule  for  determining  the 
date  of  the  rising  of  Sirius,  the  star  must  be  seen,  or  known  to 
be  in  a place  where  it  could  be  seen  if  the  atmospheric  con- 
ditions were  ordinarily  favorable,  and  that  rising  was  chosen 
which  was  first  marked  by  the  moon  following  the  summer 
solstice.  This  must  have  been  the  case,  or  the  risings  would  be 
like  those  of  every  year,  which  they  evidently  were  not.  There 
are  scattered  notices  of  such  risings  on  different  dates  of  the 
vague  year,  and  in  every  instance,  if  my  position  is  correct,  they 
were  observed  in  connection  with  the  new  or  full  moon  following 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  93 

the  summer  solstice.  The  rising  in  b.c.  832  on  the  1st  of  Tybi 
was  without  either  the  new  or  the  full  moon  on  that  date,  and 
is  valueless  by  itself  to  determine  the  epoch  of  Takelath  II. 

When  we  come  to  consider  the  eclipse  of  the  moon  in  the 
fifteenth  year  of  this  king  many  difficulties  are  met,  caused  by 
the  condition  of  the  inscription  and  the  inaccuracy  of  some  of 
the  copies  which  have  been  made  of  it.  Dr.  Brugsch  (“  Egypt 
under  the  Pharaohs,”  vol.  ii.  pp.  217,  218,  Eng.  trans.)  gives  the 
following  account  of  it:  Usarkon,  the  eldest  son  of  Takelath 
II.,  was  the  high-priest  of  the  Theban  Amon,  the  commander-in- 
chief of  the  army,  and  also  a petty  king.  He  is  the  Usarkon 
of  whom  so  much  is  related  on  a memorial-tablet  in  the  interior 
of  the  Hall  of  the  Bubastids.  The  account  begins  with  the  9th 
of  Thoth,  in  the  twelfth  year  of  his  father  (Takelath  II.). 

At  this  time  Usarkon  went  to  Thebes  in  his  character  of  high- 
priest.  The  continuity  of  the  record  is  broken  in  several  places 
by  lacunse.  In  spite  of  the  damaged  condition  of  the  inscrip- 
tion, the  purpose  of  his  presence  in  Thebes  can  be  made  out. 
Further  on  is  related  the  following  event  of  the  fifteenth  year. 

“When  now  had  arrived  the  fifteenth  year,  the  month  Mesori, 
the  25th  day,  under  the  reign  of  his  father,  the  lordly  Horus, 
the  godlike  prince  of  Thebes,  the  heaven  could  not  be  distin- 
guished,, the  moon  was  eclipsed  (literally,  was  horrible ),  for  a sign 
of  the  (coming)  events  in  this  land ; as  it  also  happened,  for 
enemies  ( literally , the  children  of  revolt)  invaded  with  war  the 
southern  and  northern  districts  (of  Egypt).” 

Dr.  Brugsch  remarks  upon  this,  “The  eclipse  of  the  moon, 
which  is  mentioned  in  the  discourse  as  a warning  of  the  coming 
events,  I still  continue  to  maintain,  notwithstanding  all  the 
objections  of  M.  Chabas.  So  long  as  no  better-founded  objec- 
tion is  brought  against  it  than  such  as  have  been  hitherto 
urged,  it  must  surely  be  accepted  as  a fact,  that  on  the  25th  of 
Mesori,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Takelath  II.,  a 
total  eclipse  of  the  moon  took  place  in  Egypt.”  The  authority 
of  Dr.  Brugsch,  in  the  matter  of  exactness  and  correctness,  is 
very  great.  He  says  he  has  several  times  confirmed  the  state- 
ment from  the  monument  itself,  and  his  testimony  is  sufficient  to 
decide  in  favor  of  the  date  25th  of  Mesori.  The  ground  is  taken 
that  an  ordinary  eclipse  of  the  moon  is  described.  This  is  not 


94 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


necessarily  the  case,  nor  is  the  chronological  value  of  the 
inscription  altogether  destroyed  if  assent  is  given  to  an  oppo- 
site view.  The  moon  could  be  under  a shadow,  but  from  a dif- 
ferent cause  than  that  of  an  eclipse.  May  not  the  expressions 
“ the  moon  was  struggling,”  or  “ the  moon  was  horrible,”  liter- 
ally describe  the  appearance  of  the  moon  which  could  be  caused 
in  some  unknown,  but  not  impossible,  way?  The  expressions 
“ the  heaven  could  not  be  distinguished,”  or  was  “ invisible,” 
may  describe  accurately  the  fact  that  the  stars  could  not  be 
seen,  and  that  no  euphuism  is  intended  here  respecting  the 
deprivation  of  the  moon  of  her  light.  The  fact  is,  the  heaven 
is  more  visible — meaning  by  that  the  starry  vault — on  the  occa- 
sion of  an  eclipse  than  when  the  full  moon  is  unobscured.  Still, 
the  prodigy  is  spoken  of  just  as  an  eclipse  would  be,  and  the 
fact  that  it  was  taken  as  an  omen  points  also  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, for  eclipses  were  looked  upon  as  signs  of  good  and  evil 
fortune.  If  we  suppose  that  this  event  took  place  on  the  day 
of  the  full  moon,  and  the  effect  was  similar  to  that  of  an  eclipse, 
with  the  addition  of  the  total  obscuration  of  the  heavens,  we 
find  good  reasons  why  it  was  supposed  to  be  an  omen  of  evil, 
and  presaging  coming  troubles  to  the  land.  In  a.d.  1678,  Janu- 
ary 12,  there  was  a strange  darkness  at  noonday.  All  physical 
phenomena  of  this  character  are  looked  upon  by  the  ignorant 
and  superstitious  as  ominous  of  evil.  Without  knowledge  there 
is  always  fear,  and  it  is  only  by  faith  born  of  experience  that 
men  are  able  to  withstand  the  horror  that  is  ever  at  hand  to 
seize  them.  For  the  superstition  about  eclipses  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  go  to  antiquity,  nor  to  semi-civilized  and  savage  peoples 
of  the  present  day ; we  have  only  to  recall  the  account  of  the 
eclipse  of  a.d.  1654,  when  multitudes  of  people  shut  themselves 
up  in  cellars.  But  eclipses  were  not  always  regarded  as  omens 
of  evil.  An  inscription,  which  may  be  found  translated  in  the 
“Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  iii.,  of  the  Annals  of  Assur-Nasir- 
Pal  (Sardanapalus),  contains  the  following : 

44.  “ (And)  in  my  first  campaign  when  the 
Sun-god,-  guider  of  the  lands,  threw 
over  me  his  beneficent  protection.” 

An  appended  note  as  to  the  meaning  of  “ protection”  is,  “ or 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATII  II.  AND  RAMESES  IT.  95 


shade.  This  may  refer  to  the  eclipse  of  the  13th  of  July,  b.c. 
885.”  Pianki,  in  his  inscription,  which  will  be  often  quoted  later 
on  in  this  work,  in  addressing  Nimrod,  king  of  Hermopolis 
Magna,  exclaims,  “ Hast  thou  forgotten  that  the  shadow  of  a 
god  rests  upon  me.”  From  Assyrian  astronomical  tablets 
(“  Becords  of  the  Past,”  vol.  i.)  may  be  learned  to  what  refine- 
ment the  superstition  was  carried.  One  of  these  is  as  follows: 

Tablet  XII. 

15.  “ In  the  month  of  Sivan  (on)  the  14th  day  an 

eclipse  happens  ; and  in  the  east  it  begins, 
and  in  the  west  it  ends. 

16.  In  the  night  watch  it  begins,  and  in  the 
morning  watch  it  ends.  Eastward  at  the 
time  of  appearance  and  cessation  its 

17.  shadow  is  seen ; and  to  the  King  of 
Dibman  the  crown  is  given.  The  King 
of  Dibman  on  the  throne  grows  old.” 

Notice  how  particularly  an  eclipse  of  the  moon  is  described ; 
if  no  mention  had  been  made  of  the  night  it  would  be  known 
as  a lunar  eclipse,  because  it  came  on  from  the  east. 

18.  “ (On)  the  15th  day  an  eclipse  takes  place. 

The  King  of  Dibman  on  the  throne  is  slain  ; 
and  a nobody  seizes  the  throne.” 

The  inscription  continues  with  eclipses  for  the  16th,  20th, 
and  21st  days,  which  are  all  unfavorable.  The  same  tablet  con- 
tains a description  of  a solar  eclipse : 

23.  “In  the  month  of  Tammuz  (on)  the  14th 

day  an  eclipse  happens  ; and  in  the  west  it 
begins  and  in  the  south  and  north  it  ends. 

24.  In  the  evening  watch  it  begins,  and  in 
the  night  watch  it  ends.  Westward  at  the 
time  of  appearance  (and)  disappearance 

25.  its  shadow  is  seen  ; and  to  the  King  of 
Gutium  a crown  is  given.  . . .” 

Here  is  described  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  ou  the  14th  of  the 
month,  which  is  also  a favorable  omen,  and  this  is  followed,  in 
portions  not  quoted,  by  eclipses  on  the  15th,  16th,  20th,  and  21st 
days,  which  are  unfavorable.  Other  inscriptions  about  other 
months  are  to  the  same  effect. 


96 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


A digression,  I hope,  may  be  pardoned  here.  These  months 
Sivan,  Tammuz,  etc.,  are  commonly  known  as  lunar  months, 
which,  according  to  the  rule,  should  begin  with  the  visible  new 
moon  on  the  1st  of  the  month,  and  yet  eclipses  of  the  sun  and 
moon  are  spoken  of  as  taking  place  for  both  kinds  on  the  14th, 
15th,  16th,  20th,  and  21st  of  the  month. 

The  measurement  of  the  tropical  year  by  lunar  months  is 
done  by  the  aid  of  cycles  which  contain  a period  of  full  lunar 
months,  and  very  nearly  the  same  time  as  a number  of  full 
tropical  years.  While  this  is  true  of  the  cycle,  each  year  shows 
a different  state  of  things.  The  year  is  taken  as  of  twelve 
lunar  months  of  three  hundred  and  fifty-four  days,  which  are 
eleven  days  shorter  than  the  common  year,  so  from  time  to  time 
a month  of  thirty  days  is  added  to  overcome  this  shortage,  and 
it  happens  that  the  luni-solar  year  varies  in  its  excess  of  length 
from  one  to  twenty-eight  days.  A luni-solar  cycle  may  be  con- 
structed, differing  not  in  principle,  but  in  process,  from  the 
cycle  of  Meton,  and  which  will  permit  of  lunar  dates  upon  other 
than  the  1st  and  14th  days  of  the  month. 

We  will  suppose  a cycle  of  eighty-four  years  subdivided  into 
four  smaller  cycles,  each  of  twenty-one  years.  The  years  are 
composed  of  twelve  months,  alternately  of  thirty  and  twenty- 
nine  days,  which  at  proper  times  are  intercalated  with  a month 
of  thirty  days.  The  place  of  the  tropical  point,  in  respect  to 
the  moon  at  the  beginning,  will  determine  the  years  which  are 
to  be  intercalated,  because  the  luni-solar  year  is  not  to  be  exces- 
sively intercalated,  nor  allowed  to  fall  behind  the  tropical  year. 
We  will  suppose,  for  convenience  of  discovering  the  degree  of 
exactness  of  the  cycle,  that  it  commences  with  the  new  moon 
at  the  vernal  equinox.  Twenty-one  tropical  years  contain 
seven  thousand  six  hundred  and  seventy  days  plus,  and  two 
hundred  and  sixty  synods  of  the  moon  are  seven  days,  twenty 
hours, plus,  longer  than  that.  Two  hundred  and  sixty  months  are 
put  in  the  calendar  for  each  cycle,  half  of  which  are  of  thirty 
days  and  half  of  twenty-nine  days.  Eight  of  the  months  of 
thirty  days  are  intercalary,  and  are  added  to  the  first,  third, 
sixth,  ninth,  eleventh,  fourteenth,  seventeenth,  and  twentieth 
years  of  the  cycle.  This  period  of  two  hundred  and  sixty 
months  is  seven  days  and  twenty -two  hours,  plus,  shorter  than 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  97 

two  hundred  and  sixty  synodical  months,  and  only  two  hours, 
plus,  shorter  than  twenty -one  tropical  years ; the  consequence  is 
that  the  new  moon  at  the  end  of  the  cycle  will  have  advanced 
from  the  1st  to  the  8th  of  the  month,  while  the  tropical  point 
will  remain  as  at  the  1st  of  the  first  month  of  the  first  yeai\ 
This  will  bring  the  third  quarter  of  the  moon  to  the  end  of 
Cycle  I.  or  beginning  of  Cycle  II.  Four  of  these  cycles  will 
begin  at  the  vernal  equinox:  the  first  with  the  new  moon,  the 
second  with  the  third  quarter  of  the  moon,  the  third  with  full 
moon,  and  the  fourth  with  the  second  quarter.  Four  cycles  of 
two  hundred  and  sixty  months  contain  ten  hundred  and  forty 
months,  which  are  one  day  and  twenty-two  hours,  plus , shorter 
than  ten  hundred  and  thirty-nine  synodical  months,  the  latter 
having  gained  nearly  two  days  over  the  former  in  that  time, 
and  the  lunar  dates  travelled  through  the  entire  month.  A 
series  of  these  may  be  extended  to  great  length  by  forming 
larger  cycles  of  lesser  ones. 

4 cycles  of  21  years  equal  84  years. 

4 “ 84  “ 336  “ 

4 “ 336  “ 1344  “ 

Four  cycles  of  eighty-four  years  are  seven  days  and  seventeen 
hours,  plus,  shorter  than  four  thousand  one  hundred  and  fifty-six 
lunations,  which  will  require  anew  beginning  for  the  next  cycle 
by  beginning  one  phase  of  the  moon  back;  in  other  words, 
what  happened  to  the  cycle  of  twenty-one  years  in  the  period 
of  eighty-four  years  now  happens  to  that  of  eighty-four  years  in 
the  period  of  three  hundred  and  thirty-six  years,  and  what  will 
happen  in  the  period  of  thirteen  hundred  and  forty-four  years, 
with  cycles  of  three  hundred  and  thirty-six  years,  will  have  the 
same  character.  The  series  need  not  be  carried  to  this  length,  but 
a new  one  may  be  commenced  after  six  hundred  and  eighty-seven 
years,  which  contain  a number  of  full  tropical  years  and  full 
synodical  months,  with  a difference  of  less  than  thirty  minutes. 

The  following  tables  are  for  use  with  this  cycle  : 

Table  I. 

This  table  contains  corrections  for  the  cycles.  The  correction 
for  twenty-one  years  is  eleven  hours,  thirty-seven  minutes,  and 

9 


98 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


eleven  seconds.  It  is  the  difference  between  one-fourth  of  a 
lunation,  seven  days,  nine  hours,  and  eleven  minutes,  and  the 
excess  of  two  hundred  and  sixty  synodical  months,  seven  days, 
twenty  hours,  forty-eight  minutes,  and  twelve  seconds  over 
twenty-one  tropical  years. 


D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

Cycle  I.  of 

twenty-one 

years : 

correction 

. 00 

00 

00 

00 

“ II. 

tt 

it 

It 

. 00 

11 

37 

11 

“ III. 

tt 

it 

It 

. 00 

23 

14 

22 

“ IV. 

It 

a 

it 

1 

10 

51 

34 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

Cycle  I.  of 

eighty-four 

years : 

correction 

. 00 

00 

00 

00 

“ 11. 

tt 

tt 

It 

. 1 

22 

28 

45 

“ III. 

It 

tt 

It 

. 3 

20 

57 

30 

“ IV. 

a 

tt 

tt 

. 5 

19 

26 

15 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

Cycle  I.  of  three  hundred  and  thirty-six  years  : correction 

00 

00 

00 

00 

“ II. 

it 

tt  a a 

00 

8 

43 

59 

“ III. 

It 

a it  a 

00 

17 

27 

58 

“ IV. 

a 

a tt  it 

1 

2 

11 

58 

Table  II. 

This  table  is  for  a cycle  of  twenty-one  years,  beginning  with 
any  phase  at  the  vernal  equinox  0 d.  0 h.  0 m.  The  time  oppo- 
site each  year  is  that  between  the  phase  and  the  vernal  equinox, 
the  particular  phase  in  all  cases  being  the  one  at  or  next  follow- 
ing this  point. 


Year. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

1 

00 

00 

00 

00 

2 

18 

16 

43 

51 

3 

7 

18 

43 

39 

4 

26 

10 

27 

30 

5 

15 

13 

27 

18 

6 

4 

16 

27 

6 

7 

23 

8 

10 

57 

8 

12 

11 

10 

45 

9 

. . 1 

14 

10 

33. 

10 

20 

5 

54 

24 

11 

9 

8 

54 

12 

12 

28 

00 

38 

3 

13 

17 

3 

37 

61 

THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  99 


Year. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

14 

6 

6 

37 

39 

15 

24 

22 

21 

30 

16 

14 

1 

21 

18 

17 • ... 

3 

4 

21 

6 

18 

21 

20 

4 

57 

19 

10 

23 

4 

45 

20 

00 

2 

4 

33 

21 

18 

17 

48 

24 

Table  III. 

This  table  gives  the  epochs  of  all  the  cycles,  also  the  phase  of 
the  moon  beginning  each. 

Each  column  of  epochs,  of  which  there  are  four,  is  divided 
into  four  cycles  of  eighty-four  years,  and  each  of  the  latter  has 
four  cycles  of  twenty-one  years,  and  the  whole  period  of  thirteen 
hundred  and  forty-four  years  is  divided  into  four  cycles  of  three 
hundred  and  thirty-six  years. 


Cycles 
of  84 
Years. 

Cycles 
OF  21 
Years. 

Cycles  of  Three  Hundred  and  Thirty-six  Years. 

I. 

II. 

III. 

IV. 

1 

B.C. 

1698 

N. 

B.C. 

1362 

3q. 

B.C. 

1026 

F. 

B.C. 

690 

2q. 

I. 

2 

1677 

3q. 

1341 

F. 

1005 

2q. 

669 

N. 

3 

1656 

F. 

1320 

2 q. 

984 

N. 

648 

3q. 

4 

1635 

2q. 

1299 

N. 

963 

3q. 

627 

F. 

1 

1614 

N. 

1278 

3q. 

942 

F. 

606 

2q. 

II. 

2 

1593 

3q. 

1257 

F. 

921 

2q. 

585 

N. 

3 

1572 

F. 

1236 

2q. 

900 

N. 

564 

3q. 

4 

1551 

2q. 

1215 

N. 

879 

3q. 

643 

F. 

1 

1530 

N. 

1194 

3 q. 

858 

F. 

522 

2q. 

III. 

2 

1509 

3q. 

1173 

F. 

837 

2 q. 

501 

N. 

3 

1488 

F. 

1152 

2 q. 

816 

N. 

480 

3q. 

4 

1467 

2q. 

1131 

N. 

795 

3q. 

459 

F. 

1 

1446 

N. 

1110 

3 q. 

774 

F. 

438 

2q. 

IV. 

2 

1425 

3 q. 

1089 

F. 

753 

2 q. 

417 

N. 

3 

1404 

F. 

1068 

2 q. 

732 

N. 

396 

Sq. 

4 

1383 

2q. 

1047 

N. 

711 

3q. 

375 

F. 

100 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


To  illustrate  the  workings  of  this  method,  take  the  year  b.c. 
851,  in  which  there  was  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  on  March  2,  from 
which  we  may  infer  there  was  a conjunction  of  the  sun  and 
moon  on  April  1 following. 

In  this  year  the  vernal  equinox  was  on  March  29,  the  new 
moon  being  three  days  later.  The  year  b.c.  851  (see  Table  III.) 
is  in  the  first  cycle  of  twenty-one  years  of  the  third  cycle  of 
eighty-four  years  of  the  third  cycle  of  three  hundred  and 
thirty-six  years ; hence  the  corrections  are : 


D.  h.  m.  s. 

First  cycle  of  twenty-one  years 00  00  00  00 

Third  cycle  of  eighty-four  years 3 20  57  30 


Third  cycle  of  three  hundred  and  thirty-six  years  . 00  17  27  58 

4 14  25  28 

b.c.  851  is  the  eighth  year  of  the  cycle  which  began  in  b.c. 
858,  and  the  amount  opposite  year  8 in  Table  II.  is  to  be  added 
to  the  corrections  to  find  the  time  the  full  moon  falls  after  the 
vernal  equinox  in  b.c.  851.  This  is  the  full  moon,  because  in 
Table  III.  we  find  that  the  cycle  which  began  in  b.c.  858  began 
with  full  moon  nominally  at  the  vernal  equinox. 


D,  h.  m.  s. 

Corrections 4 14  25  28 

Time  for  year  8 12  11  10  45 

17  1 36  13 

The  vernal  equinox  was  on  the  29th  of  March  ; this  date,  plus 
seventeen  days,  one  hour,  thirty-six  minutes,  thirteen  seconds, 
and  minus  one-half  a lunation,  will  give  the  time  of  new  moon 
in  reference  to  the  vernal  equinox. 


D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

March  29 

17 

1 

36 

13 

46 

1 

36 

13 

31 

15 

1 

36 

13 

14 

18 

22 

1 

New  moon  0 7 14  12  1st  of  April. 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  101 

The  new  moon  is  on  the  1st  of  April,  as  required.  No  allow- 
ance has  been  made  for  the  hour  and  minute  of  the  day  April 
5,  b.c.  1698,  of  the  time  the  sun  was  at  the  equinox,  nor  for  the 
exact  time  of  the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon  on  that  day. 
They  have  been  taken  as  the  same,  which  is  not  correct.  If 
the  tropical  period  between  the  vernal  equinoxes  of  b.c.  1689  and 
b.c.  851  is  scientifically  followed,  and  the  lunar  period  for  the 
same,  the  result  will  vary  slightly.  The  method  is  accurate 
enough  to  bring  the  new  moon,  in  this  instance,  to  the  proper 
date,  April  1. 

The  peculiarity  of  these  cycles  is,  they  begin  successively  one 
phase  of  the  moon  back  of  the  phase  which  began  a preceding 
one;  hence  the  lunar  months  will  follow  a similar  rule.  If 
Nisan  began  in  b.c.  1698  at  the  vernal  equinox,  Nisan  in  b.c. 
1677  (see  Table  III.)  will  begin  at  the  third  quarter  of  the  moon, 
and  so  on.  The  months,  according  to  the  cycle,  will  begin  at 
different  phases  of  the  moon.  If  Nisan  began  at  another 
phase  in  b.c.  1698,  the  phases  for  each  cycle  must  be  replaced 
by  other  proper  ones.  The  columns  of  phases  will  be  the  same, 
but  their  order  changed ; that  is,  if  Nisan  began  with  the  second 
quarter,  the  column  which  it  heads,  the  last  one,  will  change 
places  with  the  first.  The  succession  will  be  the  same  ; that  is, 
as  if  these  columns  were  arranged  in  a circle  about  a centre, 
and  revolving  in  one  direction,  any  one  may  be  chosen  as 
the  first,  but  the  succession  will  be  always  the  same.  When- 
ever Nisan  begins  with  a full  moon,  the  new  moon  will  be  on 
the  14th  of  Nisan,  and  the  new  moon  during  the  progress 
of  this  cycle  of  twenty-one  years  will  move  from  the  14th 
to  the  21st  day,  passing  through  the  same  dates  as  are  men- 
tioned in  the  inscriptions  quoted.  The  explanation  of  this 
cycle  is  more  complicated  than  the  working  of  it.  The  only 
rule  to  be  followed  is  the  beginning  of  Nisan,  by  a cycle  of 
twenty-one  years , at  the  phase  of  the  moon  next  following 
the  vernal  equinox.  The  four  general  epochs,  from  any  one 
of  which  a series  can  be  counted,  are  to  be  found  in  Table 
III.,  Cycle  I.,  of  eighty-four  years,  heading  the  four  divisions 
of  that  cycle.  I have  produced  this  cycle  to  account  for  the 
week  of  dates  found  in  these  inscriptions,  and  to  call  atten- 
tion to  the  resemblance  of  this  week  to  the  Jewish  feast  of 

9* 


102 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


unleavened  bread,  which  was  kept  as  a memorial  of  their  coming 
out  of  Egypt.* 

But  there  is  another  cycle  by  means  of  which  solar  and  lunar 
eclipses  may  be  brought  to  these  dates.  If  the  one  previously 
described  was  ever  in  use  it  was  probably  succeeded  by  the  one 
now  to  be  described,  which  in  its  turn  was  displaced  by  the 
luni-solar  cycle  of  historic  times.  This  is  a cycle  of  six  years. 
In  this  case  the  months  are  all  of  thirty  days,  there  being  twelve 
such  in  each  year,  and  at  the  end  of  six  of  such  years  an  inter- 
calary month  of  thirty  days  was  added,  making  every  six  years 
equal  to  that  many  Egyptian  vague  years.  The  months  had 
the  same  names  as  those  which  have  survived  in  the  luni-solar 
year,  Nisan,  Tyar,  Sivan,  etc.  The  peculiarity  of  it  was  that  it 
permitted  another  set  of  months,  with  the  same  names,  to  ho  cur- 
rent at  the  same  time,  the  latter  being  strictly  lunar  months.  The 
vague  month  of  thirty  days  and  the  lunar  month  had  the  same 
new  moon,  which  in  one  case  fell  on  no  fixed  date,  but  wherever 
the  new  moon  date  happened,  and  in  the  other  case  the  new 
moon  began  the  month.  The  lunar  month  Nisan  began  either 
at  the  same  time  as  the  vague  month  Nisan,  in  which  case  the 
new  moon  will  begin  both  months,  or  on  the  date  of  the  new 
moon  in  the  vague  Nisan.  Whenever  there  were  two  new 
moons  in  the  vague  Nisan  there  were  two  Nisans  in  the  lunar 
year,  and  whenever  there  were  two  new  moons  in  Adar  of  the 
vague  year,  the  lunar  year  had  a second  Adar,  called  Ye  Adar, 
and  whenever  the  intercalary  month  at  the  end  of  the  cycle 
was  added,  which  was  a vague  Ye  Adar,  the  lunar  year  also  had 
a second  Adar.  As  there  can  be  only  seventy-four  new  moons  in 
six  vague  years,  these  are  provided  for  in  the  vague  year,  two 
falling  in  each  of  some  two  months  in  every  cycle  of  six  years. 
The  lunar  year  will  follow  the  vague,  and  have  a second  month 


* The  five  successive  kings  who  reigned  over  Assyria  and  Babylonia, 
beginning  with  Sennacherib  and  ending  with  Nabopolassaros  or  Nabupal- 
sar,  are  all  furnished  by  Alexander  Polybistor  with  lengths  of  reigns  cyclic 
in  character.  Sennacherib  reigns  eighteen  years,  a saros ; Esarh addon 
reigns  eight  years,  an  Octaeteris  if  a year  like  the  Julian  was  known  as 
early  as  b.c.  60;  and  Sammueges,  Kineladanos,  and  Nabupalsar  each 
reign  twenty-one  years,  the  cyclic  character  of  which  has  just  been 
described. 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  103 

of  the  same  name  whenever  two  new  moons  fall  in  the  corre- 
sponding month  of  the  vague  year.  This  cycle  may  be  adapted 
to  the  tropical  year  by  reckoning  its  years  from  the  new  or  full 
moon  following  the  vernal  equinox.  Whenever  the  tropical 
point  advances  in  the  vague  year,  for  example,  a half  of  a luna- 
tion, which  it  will  do  in  about  sixty-one  years,  but  sixty  years 
will  mark  the  period,  because  the  cycle  has  an  excess  of  lunar 
time,  which  will  not  be  affected  by  taking  it  a year  short,  the 
vague  year  will  receive  a second  Nisan.  The  inscriptions  men- 
tion a second  Hisan  and  a second  Adar,  and  they  also  speak  of 
the  days  and  nights  being  “ balanced,” — that  is,  “ six  hours  of  day 
and  six  hours  of  night”  on  the  6th  and  15th  of  Nisan,  which 
are  understood  to  be  dates  of  the  vernal  equinox. 

The  Assyrian  Canon  (George  Smith),  page  63,  mentions  an 
eclipse  in  the  month  Sivan,  in  the  eponym  of  Esdusorabc, 
without  giving  the  date,  which  was  followed  by  a revolt  in  the 
city  of  Assur  and  other  towns  lasting  four  years.  It  may  be 
conjectured  from  the  unfavorable  omens  of  eclipses  on  daj^s 
between  the  14th  and  22d  of  the  month  that  this  eclipse  fell 
within  those  dates.  Prejudices  are  formed  by  misfortune  and 
predilections  by  good  fortune.  The  supreme  civil  power  is 
made  responsible  for  public  weal  or  woe.  Let  once  a super- 
stition get  hold  upon  a nation  that  eclipses  occurring  on  certain 
days  of  certain  months  presage  evil,  because  the  gods  are  evilly 
disposed,  and  let  this  be  accompanied  by  disaffection  caused  by 
tyranny  and  misrule,  or  other  misfortune,  and  let  there  be  bold 
and  opportune  leaders  ripe  for  rebellion,  either  to  save  them- 
selves from  the  jealousy  of  a monarch,  or  ambitious  enough  to 
dispossess  him  of  his  throne,  and  add  to  this  the  ability  to  recog- 
nize the  right  moment  for  a successful  revolt,  or  one  which 
promises  the  most  success,  and  we  have  the  reason  why  a super- 
stition affecting  certain  days  will  be  prolonged  and  strengthened 
by  the  circumstances  which  it  itself  has  had  a no  mean  part  in 
creating.  Take  the  eclipse  predicted  by  Thales,  which,  accord- 
ing to  Herodotus  (Book  i.  74),  occurred  in  the  sixth  year  during 
a battle  between  the  Medes  and  Lydians,  which  caused  both 
parties  to  cease  from  fighting  and  to  form  an  alliance;  or  the 
eclipse  mentioned  by  Xenophon  (Anab.  iii.  4,  § 7)  at  the 
taking  of  Larissa  by  the  Persians,  which  compelled  the  Medes 


104 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


to  retire,  and  brought  about  the  capture  of  the  city  by  the 
Persians. 

In  one  case,  as  both  parties  were  equally  matched  it  produces 
the  same  effect  upon  both;  in  tho  other  case  the  Persians  are 
successful  against  the  Medes,  and  granting  that  both  parties 
were  equally  superstitious  about  the  matter,  the  cause  of  the 
success  of  the  Persians  must  be  credited  to  the  possession  of 
qualities  and  powers,  which  would  have  given  them  the  victory 
even  if  no  eclipse  had  taken  place,  because  the  reaction  is 
quicker;  but  the  eclipse,  being  a factor  in  the  struggle,  the  effect 
will,  in  the  future,  to  the  victors  be  an  omen  of  good,  and  to 
the  defeated  an  omen  of  evil.  It  appears  the  Persians  drew 
favorable  omens  from  solar  eclipses,  and  the  predilection  is 
probably  due  in  part  to  the  fortunate  issue  of  the  battle  of 
Larissa,  which  broke  the  power  of  the  Medes  and  established 
the  supremacy  of  the  Persians.  The  effect  and  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  eclipse  at  Sardis  at  the  time  of  the  departure  of 
Xerxes  in  his  expedition  against  the  Greeks  is  described  by 
Herodotus  (Book  vii.  chap,  xxxvii).  “ Day  was  thus  turned  into 
night;  whereupon  Xerxes,  who  saw  and  remarked  the  prodigy, 
was  seized  with  alarm,  and,  sending  at  once  for  the  Magians,  in- 
quired of  them  the  meaning  of  the  portent.  They  replied,  ‘God 
is  foreshadowing  to  the  Greeks  the  destruction  of  their  cities ; 
for  the  sun  foretells  for  them  and  the  moon  for  us.’  ” This 
must  mean,  as  this  is  a solar  eclipse  described  as  presaging  good 
to  the  Persians,  that  in  a solar  eclipse  it  is  the  moon  that  over- 
comes the  sun,  and  hence  foretells  the  triumph  of  the  Persians. 

Eeturning  to  the  subject  previously  under  discussion,  I offer 
the  following  explanation  of  the  two  dates  in  the  reign  of  Take- 
lath  II. 

I find  that  in  b.c.  835  the  full  moon  was  on  the  1st  of  Tybi, 
concurrent  with  July  15  (adjustment  of  1st  of  Thoth  to  Feb- 
ruary 23,  b.c.  747).  The  rising  of  Sirius  on  this  day  fulfils  all 
the  conditions  which  have  been  laid  down  as  technically  neces- 
sary to  such  an  event. 

I find  that  in  b.c.  842  the  full  moon  was  on  the  25th  of  Mesori, 
concurrent  with  March  8,  and  this  was  in  a fifteenth  vague  year 
reckoned  from  a first  year  which  had  the  full  moon  on  the  1st 
of  Thoth,  b.c.  857.  This  may  be  considered  as  another  form  of 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESIS  II.  105 

the  Apis  cycle,  or  cycle  of  twenty -five  years.  The  other  form 
of  this  cycle,  as  previously  set  forth  in  this  work,  began  with 
the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon  on  the  1st  of  Thoth,  and 
one  such  began  in  b.c.  850. 

In  connection  with  the  cycle  of  twenty-five  years,  which 
began  with  the  full  moon  of  Thoth,  b.c.  857,  there  was  another 
of  the  fifteenth  year,  which  may  be  styled  the  Indication  of  the 
fifteenth  year , to  distinguish  it  from  the  so-called  cycle  of  Indic- 
tion. 

In  connection  with  the  sidereal  year  there  was  a cycle  of  the 
twelfth  year,  which  also  may  be  called  the  Indication  of  the 
twelfth  year. 

The  indication  of  the  fifteenth  year  contained  fourteen  vague 
years,  and  the  cycle  is  used  to  mark  the  falling  back  of  the 
lunar  dates  one  day;  that  is,  if  in  year  1 the  full  moon  was  on 
the  1st  and  30th  of  Thoth,  falling  twice  in  that  month,  in  the 
fifteenth  year  it  will  fall  on  the  29th  of  Thoth. 

The  indication  of  the  twelfth  year  was  a cjmlo  of  eleven  years, 
which  is  used  to  mark  the  advance  of  the  lunar  dates  one  day  ; 
that  is,  if  full  moon  was  on  the  1st  of  Thoth  in  year  1,  it  will 
in  year  12,  which  is  the  first  year  of  the  next  cycle,  fall  on  the 
2d  of  Thoth. 

The  following  table  contains  the  two  cycles  of  twenty-five 
years,  and  the  two  indications  for  the  same  period  with  their 
Julian  epochs.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  eleventh  year  of  the 
indication  of  the  twelfth  year  corresponds  with  the  vague  year 
which  began  in  b.c.  835,  which  had  full  moon  on  the  1st  of  Tybi, 
also  that  Mesori  of  the  first  year  of  the  indication  of  the  fifteenth 
year,  which  is  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  cycle  of  twenty-five  years, 
which  began  with  full  moon  on  the  1st  of  Thoth,  falls  in  b.c. 
842,  the  year  which  has  full  moon  on  the  25th  of  Mesori,  con- 
current with  March  8.  The  expression  “ fifteenth  year”  means 
the  first  year  of  a cycle  of  fourteen  years,  both  extremes  being 
counted  according  to  ancient  practice ; that  is,  as  if  reckoning 
from  an  era. 


106 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


B.C. 

Cycle  of  b c.  850. 
New  Moon  on 
1st  Thoth. 

Cycle  of  b.c.  857. 
Full  Moon  on 
1st  Thoth. 

Indication  of 
the  Fifteenth 
Year. 

Indication  of 
the  Twelfth 
Year. 

857 

18-19 

25-  1 

14-  1 

10-11 

856 

19-20 

1-  2 

1-  2 

11-  1 

855 

20-21 

2-  3 

2-  3 

1-  2 

854 

21-22 

3-  4 

3-  4 

2-  3 

853 

22-23 

4-  5 

4-  5 

3-  4 

852 

23-24 

5-  6 

5-  6 

4-  5 

851 

24-25 

6-  7 

6-  7 

5-  6 

850 

25-  1 

7-  8 

7-  8 

6-  7 

849 

1-  2 

8-  9 

8-  9 

7-  8 

848 

2-  3 

9-10 

9-10 

8-  9 

847 

3-  4 

10-11 

10-11 

9-10 

846 

4-  5 

11-12 

11-12 

10-11 

845 

5-  6 

12-13 

12-13 

11-  1 

844 

6-  7 

13-14 

13-14 

1-  2 

843 

7-  8 

14-15 

14-  1 

2-  3 

842 

8-  9 

15-16 

1-  2 

3-  4 

841 

9-10 

16-17 

2-  3 

4-  5 

840 

10-11 

17-18 

3-  4 

5-  6 

839 

11-12 

18-19 

4-  5 

6-  7 

838 

12-13 

19-20 

5-  6 

7-  8 

837 

13-14 

20-21 

6-  7 

8-  9 

836 

14-15 

21-22 

7-  8 

9-10 

835 

15-16 

22-21 

8-  9 

10-11 

834 

16-17 

23-24 

9-10 

11-  1 

833 

17-18 

24-25 

10-11 

1-  2 

832 

18-19 

25-  1 

11-12 

2-  3 

In  this  way  the  epochs  of  the  two  dates  in  the  reign  of 
Takelath  II.  may  be  obtained.  The  years  given  for  those  dates 
in  the  inscriptions  are  not  regnal  years  in  the  sense  that  they 
denote  the  duration  of  his  reign,  but  they  are  those  of  the  eycles 
just  described  and  exemplified.  To  show  I am  right  in  one  par- 
ticular is  all  that  is  necessary.  I have  shown  in  previous  chap- 
ters that  Sirius  rose  in  b.c.  1318  on  the  1st  of  Thoth,  concurrent 
with  July  16,  the  day  of  the  full  moon;  also,  that  the  star  rose 
in  the  reign  of  Eameses  II.,  b.c.  999,  on  the  23d  of  Athyr,  con- 
current with  the  18th  of  July,  the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon, 
and  now  that  in  b.c.  835  the  full  moon  and  the  rise  of  Sirius  were 
on  the  1st  of  Tybi.  Between  b.c.  1318  and  b.c.  999  are  three 
hundred  and  nineteen  years,  or  twenty-three  cycles  of  eleven 
years ; between  b.c.  999  and  b.c.  845,  the  first  year  of  the  cycle 
whose  eleventh  year  fell  in  b.c.  835-834,  are  one  hundred  and 
fifty-four  years,  or  exactly  fourteen  cycles  of  eleven  years. 


THE  PERIOD  BETWEEN  TAKELATH  II.  AND  RAMESES  II.  107 

b.c.  1318  and  b.c.  999  Lave  each  the  first  years  of  these  cyeles, 
that  of  b.c.  999  being  so  denominated  in  the  inscription  of 
Eameses  II.,  which  mentions  the  event,  and  that  of  b.c.  835  is 
in  the  eleventh  year  of  the  cycle,  agreeing  with  the  inscription 
which  mentions  the  rise  of  Sirius  in  an  eleventh  year  in  the 
reign  of  Takelath  II. 

The  cycle  of  eleven  years  is  also  found  in  the  reckoning  of  the 
rise  of  Sirius  by  the  one  hundredth  year;  there  being  nine 
cycles  in  this  period,  the  one  hundredth  year  is  the  first  year  of 
a tenth  cycle.  These  dates  do  not  fix  the  epoch  of  Takelath’s 
first  year,  but,  as  ho  was  reigning  in  a twelfth  year,  before 
the  fifteenth  year  mentioned,  his  epoch  was  not  lower  than 
b.c.  846,  and  this  is  the  epoch  I have  given  him. 

The  copy  of  Manetho  by  Africanus  places  Takelath  II.  sixty- 
one  years  after  the  epoch  of  the  twenty-second  dynasty,  whose 
first  king  was  Sesonshis,  the  Shishak  of  the  Bible.  The  copy 
by  Eusebius  makes  this  period  to  be  thirty-six  years.  There 
are  three  unnamed  kings  in  Africanus,  omitted  by  Eusebius, 
who  reign  twenty-five  years.  If  the  period  is  put  at  forty- 
eight  years,  which  is  a mean  between  the  two,  the  epoch  of  the 
twenty-second  dynasty  and  of  Shishak,  calculated  from  the 
epoch  I have  found  for  Takelath  II.,  will  be  B.c.  894. 

Between  this  and  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty  there  is  very  little 
to  go  by  outside  of  the  conflicting  copies  of  Manetho.  With 
Tirhakah  and  Ammeres,  his  son  (Rud-amon  of  the  Egyptian 
inscription),  we  begin  to  get  hold  of  something  more  definite. 
The  regnal  yeai-s  of  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty  are  determined 
from  the  Apis  stelse  discovered  by  Mariette  Bey.  The  com- 
bined reigns  of  Tirhakah  and  Rud-amon  I estimate  at  thirty 
yeai’S.  This  is  obtained  from  Eusebius  by  deducting  eight  years 
from  the  combined  reigns  of  Tirhakah  and  Ammeres,  thirty- 
eight  years.  The  eight  years  are  those  of  Nechao  I.  (Africanus), 
who  was  a satrap  under  the  Assyrians  dui'ing  the  sti'uggle 
between  them  and  Tirhakah.  According  to  Africanus,  the 
period  fi’om  the  1st  of  Tirhakah  to  the  1st  of  Psammeticus  was 
thirty-nine  yeai'S,  which,  less  the  reign  of  ISTechao,  gives  thirty- 
one  yeai's.  According  to  Eusebius  this  period  was  fifty-seven  yeai'S, 
which,  less  the  reign  of  Ammeres,  eighteen  yeai’S,  gives  thirty- 
nine  years,  and  less  Nechao’s  reign,  eight  more  yeai’S,  leaves 


108 


EGYPTIAN  CHRONOLOGY. 


thirty-one  years.  The  copies  of  Manetho  have  inserted  three 
or  four  kings  between  Tirhakah  and  Psamraeticus,  but  they 
must  have  reigned  contemporaneously  with  Tirhakah  and 
Ammeres,  because  an  Apis  stela  mentions  the  birth  of  an  Apis 
bull  in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of  Tirhakah  and  his  death  in  the 
twentieth  year  of  Psamethik,  and  the  longest  estimate  for  his 
life  should  be  twenty-five  years,  which  will  require  thirty  years 
for  the  two  reigns  of  Tirhakah  and  his  son,  for  the  Apis  must 
be  four  years  old  when  Psamethik  ascends  the  throne  to  allow 
for  this. 

b.c.  682,  Tirhakah. 

“ 652,  Psamethik  I.,  54  years. 

“ 598,  Necho,  16  “ 

“ 582,  Psamethik  II.,  5 “ 

“ 577,  Hophra,  19  “ 

“ 558,  Amasis,  44  “ 

“ 514,  Psamethik  III.,  6 months. 

These  epochs,  except  that  of  Tirhakah,  which  is  eleven  years 
lower,  are  fourteen  years  lower  than  those  given  by  Dr.  Brugsch 
to  these  kings.  The  epoch  of  the  Persian  invasion,  which  is 
the  same  as  that  of  Psamethik  III.,  or  the  year  following,  is 
usually  placed  at  b.c.  525.  It  is  uncertain  whether  Cyrus  or 
Cambyses  was  the  Persian  king  who  invaded  Egypt.  Xenophon 
declares  the  king  was  Cyrus.  Herodotus,  while  admitting  con- 
flicting views  on  this  point,  favors  Cambyses. 


PART  II. 

JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


10 


CHAPTER  XI. 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 

The  Jews  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonian  captivity  used 
a luni-solar  year.  They  began  their  year  at  the  autumnal 
equinox,  and  to  carry  out  the  ordinance  of  the  succession  of  the 
months,  as  found  in  the  Book  of  Exodus,  they  began  their  first 
month  at  about  the  time  of  the  vernal  equinox.  From  this  has 
arisen  the  idea  that  they  observed  two  years,  one  ecclesiasti- 
cal, beginning  at  the  vernal  equinox,  and  the  other  civil,  com- 
mencing at  the  autumnal  equinox.  As  far  as  known,  they  had 
but  one  year  at  this  time ; that  is,  one  set  of  months  intercalated 
in  one  way,  but  the  ecclesiastical  beginning  was  in  the  first 
month,  and  that  belonging  to  the  civil  year  in  the  seventh 
month.  The  ordinary  luni-solar  year  requires  the  full  moon  of 
the  first  month  to  be  the  one  next  following  the  vernal  equinox. 
In  the  earlier  use  of  this  year,  it  was  one  of  observation  ; that 
is,  a constant  watch  was  kept  for  the  return  of  new  and  full 
moons.  This  was  done  in  connection  with  lunar  months  of 
thirty  and  twenty-nine  days.  One  synodical  month  contains 
twenty-nine  days,  twelve  hours,  forty-four  minutes,  and  three 
seconds.  Two  of  these  contain  one  hour,  twenty-eight  minutes, 
and  six  seconds  more  time  than  two  months,  one  of  thirty  and 
the  other  of  twenty-nine  days.  This  difference  would  increase 
if  there  were  no  method  to  stop  it,  so  that  in  twelve  months  it 
would  amount  to  over  eight  hours,  and  in  three  years  to  over 
one  day.  But  this  was  remedied  by  constant  observation.  The 
Greeks  called  the  thirtieth  day  of  the  lunar  month  “the  old  and 
the  new,”  because,  as  the  synodical  month  was  about  equal  to 
twenty-nine  and  one-half  days,  the  thirtieth  day  belonged  in 
part  to  the  following  month  of  twent}r-nine  days.  Connected 
with  this  year  was  the  beginning  of  the  day  at  sunset.  Should 
the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon  occur  at  midnight,  the 
present  beginning  of  the  civil  day,  at  which  time  we  may  sup- 

111 


112 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


pose  the  place  of  some  star,  in  reference  to  the  vernal  equinox, 
was  a part  of  the  system,  when  the  conditions  are  favorable, 
the  crescent  of  the  new  moon,  shortly  after  sunset,  about 
eighteen  hours  or  more,  may  be  seen,  and  fourteen  days, 
eighteen  hours  plus,  or  one-half  of  a mean  month  after  the  con- 
junction, the  full  moon  will  be  seen  rising  at  the  time  of  sun- 
setting. This  is  a mean  for  the  condition  of  things  contem- 
plated in  beginning  the  day  at  sunset.  From  towers  and 
elevated  places  watch  was  kept  upon  the  moon.  This  was  par- 
ticularly close  from  the  time  the  moon  was  at  her  third  quarter, 
or  the  octant  following.  Not  only  was  the  moon’s  place  among 
the  stars  noted  at  these  times,  but  by  the  experience  obtained 
from  centuries  of  observations  they  knew  to  a nicety  the  time 
of  the  conjunction  of  the  sun  and  moon  that  was  to  follow,  and 
could  determine  some  of  the  conditions  necessary  for  a solar 
eclipse.  As  these  observations  were  dependent  upon  an  unob- 
scured atmosphere  and  cloudless  skies,  they  were  often  inter- 
fered with,  particularly  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year.  The 
days  of  the  lunar  month  were  put  alternately  at  thirty  and 
twenty-nine  days,  but  this  in  a measure  depended  upon  the  visi- 
bility of  the  new  moon  in  the  evening  which  began  the  first 
day.  Sometimes  this  was  and  was  not  the  case,  but  it  was  kept 
generally  so,  which  would  require  an  additional  day  to  be  added, 
or  two  months  of  thirty  days  to  come  together.  To  avoid  this 
constant  observation  and  the  trouble  it  caused,  efforts  were  early 
made  to  form  cycles  of  years  in  which  the  knowledge  obtained 
from  former  observations  was  made  use  of  to  determine  these 
things  in  advance.  These  cycles  not  only  proposed  to  keep  the 
lunar  months  regulated  to  the  moon,  but  they  were  luni-solar; 
that  is,  they  were  to  measure  the  solar  or  tropical  year  by 
means  of  the  full  moon  following  the  vernal  equinox.  These 
cycles  all  contained  full  days,  and  consequently  were  imperfect. 
The  observations  which  formerly  were  made  for  each  month 
and  year  were  abandoned  as  unnecessary.  The  gain  was,  these 
were  only  required  to  be  made  at  the  beginning  of  each  cycle; 
it,  when  necessary,  was  to  be  corrected,  and  readjusted  to  the 
solar  and  lunar  periods.  It  was  due  to  the  abandonment  of  this 
necessary  rule,  caused,  perhaps,  by  a misconception  of  the  exact 
amount  of  error  in  each  cycle,  or,  more  likely,  by  inattention  to 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


113 


the  matter,  that  these  cycles  got  so  wrong  and  caused  so  much 
trouble  and  discussion  among  the  Jews  and  the  early  Christians. 
Other  matters  were  also  brought  in  which  caused  much  dis- 
turbance. The  cjmle  of  Meton,  which  is  said  to  have  been 
invented  b.c.  432  as  an  extension  of  the  eight  years’  cycle  of 
Cleostratus,  is  as  perfect  as  a cycle  of  this  kind  can  be.  The 
merit  of  Meton  consists  in  his  reducing  to  a calendar  form  the 
natural  luni-solar  cycle  of  nineteen  y cars.  The  error  in  this 
cycle  in  seventy-six  years,  or  four  cycles,  amounts  to  nearly  a 
day.  This  was  recognized  in  the  cyclo  of  Callippus,  which  fol- 
lowed that  of  Meton.  Callippus  constructed  his  cycle  of  four 
Metonics,  from  which  he  subtracted  one  day.  The  error  in  the 
Callippic  was  corrected  by  Hipparchus,  who  constructed  a cycle 
of  four  Callippics,  or  three  hundred  and  four  years,  which  he 
also  reduced  an  additional  day.  These  subtractions  of  one  day 
cured  within  the  limits  of  an  error  less  than  a day  their  defects 
in  solar  and  lunar  time.  It  appears  the  Jews,  when  they  aban- 
doned the  practice  of  constant  monthly  and  yearly  observations, 
took  up  with  the  Callippic  cycle,  which  they  amended  by  adding 
to  it  eight  years,  making  a cycle  of  eighty-four  years.  These 
eight  years  are  said  to  have  been  thoso  of  the  octaeteris  of 
Cleostratus,  which  contained  two  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
twenty-two  days.  If  this  description  is  correct,  they  thereby 
obtained  a cycle  of  eighty-four  years,  which  contained  a period 
of  thirty  thousand  six  hundred  and  eighty-one  days,  or  four 
thousand  three  hundred  and  eighty-three  weeks  of  seven  days. 
This,  as  well  as  four  Metonics,  contained  the  same  number  of 
days  as  like  numbers  of  Julian  years,  and  it  has  been  supposed 
this  was  the  reason  of  this  cycle.  But  in  the  case  of  the  Cal- 
lippic the  lunar  period  was  also  followed,  which  in  the  case  of 
that  of  eighty-four  years  was  very  imperfectly  done.  This 
cycle  of  eighty-four  years,  it  is  said,  was  the  one  used  by  the 
Jews  and  Christians  down  to  a.d.  320,  when  Rabbi  Hillel 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Jews  the  advantage  which  the 
cjmle  of  Meton  had  over  that  of  eighty-four  years.  One  reason 
for  the  adoption  of  the  cycle  of  eighty-four  years  by  the  Jews, 
and  perhaps  the  chief  one,  was  that  it  contained  a period  of  full 
weeks.  Indications  of  reckoning  time  by  weeks  are  to  be 
found  in  their  system.  The  feast  of  Pentecost,  or  “of  weeks,” 

10* 


114 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


and  the  use  of  the  sabbatical  week  of  years  are  instances  of 
this.  Another  probable  reason  was  their  acquaintance  at  some 
time  with  another  luni-solar  cycle  of  eighty-four  years,  which 
was  different  from  that  just  described. 

There  are  many  reasons  which  render  it  doubtful  that  the 
Jewish  practice  after  the  return  from  captivity  Avas  in  all  re- 
spects like  that  of  their  earlier  history.  The  usual  description 
of  the  Jewish  lunar  year  in  no  way  accounts  for  any  necessity 
or  fitness  to  any  scheme  or  system  of  the  two  beginnings  of  the 
year.  Moses,  in  describing  the  time  the  waters  of  the  deluge 
remained  upon  the  earth,  uses  a month  of  thirty  days;  that  is, 
a month  belonging  to  a vague  year  like  that  of  the  Egyptians 
or  Babylonians.  In  connection  with  this  fact  writers  are  con- 
tinually describing  a year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days, 
meaning  by  that  an  unintercalated  year  of  that  length.  Such  a 
year,  I contend,  never  existed.  The  five  intercalary  days  of  the 
Egyptian,  or  the  thirty  of  the  Babylonian  cycle  of  six  years, 
Avere  spaces  of  time  leaped  over;  they  technically  did  not  be- 
long to  any  year.  “The  times,  times  and  a half  of  Daniel, 
where  time  means  year,”*  have  been  explained  to  be  three  and 
a half  years  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days  to  the  year,  ox- 
twelve  hundred  and  sixty  days,  and  used  as  evidence  in  favor  of 
the  year  of  thi-ee  hundi-ed  and  sixty  days.  But  it  is  overlooked 
that  by  the  Babylonian  yeai-,  a year  Daniel  xvas  familiar  with, 
the  intercalations  wei-e  added  in  one  body  as  a month  of  thirty 
days  after  six  years  of  twelve  months  of  thii-ty  days  each,  and 
the  “times,  times  and  a half”  may  refer  to  three  and  a half 
yeax-s  falling  in  the  cycle  before  the  intei-calary  month  was 
added,  if  the  pei-iod  Avas  one  of  tAvelve  hundi-ed  and  sixty  days. 

The  great  historical  festivals  of  the  Jews  Avei-e  observed  on 
fixed  dates,  and  these  in  later  times  have  been  directly  connected 
Avith  seasons  of  the  solar  year  by  means  of  a luni-solar  cycle ; 
but  this  is  not  conclusive  as  to  the  pi-actice  at  the  time  of  the 
institution  of  these  feasts,  unless  it  can  be  shoAvn  that  the  ac- 
counts l-equii-e  or  imply  the  same  kind  of  tinxe-nxeasui-ement. 
To  determine  this  matter,  the  subject  of  Jewish  technical  chro- 
nology as  derived  infei-entially  from  the  Bible — there  is  vei-y 


* Smith’s  “ Bible  Dictionary,”  title  Chronology  (Year). 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


115 


little  direct  information  on  the  subject — will  have  to  be  gone 
over.  The  subject  falls  under  the  following  heads:  1,  days;  2, 
months  and  years  ; 3,  intercalations;  4,  the  connection  between 
the  dates  of  the  great  historical  or  religious  festivals  and  the 
time-measure;  5,  Jewish  cycles. 

Days. — The  Jewish  day  began  at  sunset.  The  feast  of  un- 
leavened bread  observed  by  the  Jews  “ in  the  first  month,  on  the 
fourteenth  day  of  the  month  at  even,”  for  seven  days  until  the 
even  of  the  twenty-first  day,  to  commemorate  their  departure 
from  Egypt,  began  with  the  fifteenth  and  concluded  with  the 
twenty-first  day,  and  not  on  the  fourteenth  and  ending  in  the 
twenty-first,  as  would  he  understood  if  they  began  their  day, 
like  the  Babylonians,  at  sunrise.  Objections  have  been  advanced 
by  some  writers  against  this  being  the  general  practice  among 
the  Jews.  Whether  the  Jews  always  began  their  day  at  sunset 
is  one  thing,  but  whether  there  is  anything  in  the  Bible  to  give 
color  to  any  diversity  of  practice  is  entirely  a different  matter. 
The  writers  of  the  Scriptures  could  not  avoid,  if  they  wished 
their  meaning  to  be  understood,  certain  forms  of  expression 
common  to  all  modes  of  conveying  ideas.  If  they  had  to  write 
of  an  event  as  happening  in  the  evening  or  morning,  or  that  of 
a morning  or  day  following  an  evening  or  night,  they  could  do 
this  without  any  reference  at  all  to  an  entirely  different  matter, 
and  of  no  consequence  to  what  they  were  writing  about,  the 
chronological  beginning  of  the  day.  All  they  may  wish  to  say 
is  that  the  events  followed  each  other.  Again,  if  some  festivals 
or  fasts  do  not  begin  at  even,  it  only  follows  they  have  no  chro- 
nological significance,  being  anniversaries  simply. 

In  Leviticus  xxiii.  5,  6 it  is  said,  “ In  the  fourteenth  day  of  the 
first  month  at  even  is  the  Lord’s  passover.  And  on  the  fifteenth 
day  of  the  same  month  is  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread.”  In 
verses  27,  32,  “ Also  on  the  tenth  day  of  this  seventh  month 
there  shall  be  a day  of  atonement.  ...  It  shall  be  unto  you  a 
sabbath  of  rest,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your  souls:  in  the  ninth  day 
of  the  month  at  even,  from  even  unto  even,  shall  ye  celebrate 
your  sabbath.”  Also  in  Leviticus  xxv.  9,  “ Then  shalt  thou 
cause  the  trumpet  of  the  jubilee  to  sound  on  the  tenth  day  of 
the  seventh  month,  in  the  day  of  atonement  shall  ye  make  the 
trumpet  sound  throughout  all  your  land.”  On  account  of  the 


116 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


phraseology  of  these  commands,  it  has  been  argued,  “ The  law- 
giver could  not  have  designated  those  very  evenings  which  he 
wished  to  belong  ritually  to  the  following  (15th,  10th)  day,  as 
the  evenings  of  the  previous  (14th,  9th)  day.”*  But  this 
is  what  is  done  in  unmistakable  language.  Certainly  in  re- 
spect to  the  day  of  atonement  is  this  the  case.  In  one  verse 
it  is  described  as  being  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  month,  and  in 
another  in  the  same  connection  “ in  the  ninth  day  of  the  month 
from  even  unto  even.”  The  trumpet  of  jubilee  was  blown  on 
the  day  of  atonement;  as  this  would  be  inconsistent  with  the 
character  of  the  day,  we  must  conclude  it  was  at  the  end  of 
that  day,  and  consequently  in  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  day. 
The  Jewish  day  began  at  sunset,  and  it  is  spoken  of  as  in  the 
evening  of  the  previous  day,  because  the  day  following  can  at 
its  beginning  only  be  described  in  this  way.  Thus,  we  say  of 
our  year,  the  1st  of  January  begins  at  midnight  of  the  31st  of 
December,  and  if  some  festival  was  connected  with  its  advent, 
the  ordinance  prescribing  its  right  observance  would  require  the 
celebration  to  begin  at  midnight  of  the  31st  of  December,  and 
not  at  midnight  of  the  1st  of  January.  The  date  of  the  begin- 
ning of  a day  is  always  given  in  the  terms  of  the  preceding 
day.  As  regards  their  beginning  their  da}rs  at  other  times, 
this  depends  upon  the  time-measurement  employed.  These  be- 
ginnings are  technical ; that  is,  they  belong  to  a system  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  ordinary  use  of  a day  in  the  affairs  of  life.  If 
in  their  religious  heresies  they  adopted  the  false  worships  of  the 
neighboring  nations,  they  may  have  also  fallen  into  other  meth- 
ods of  measuring  time,  because  in  the  adoption  of  a foreign  rit- 
ual they  would  take  with  its  prescribed  ordinances  relating  to 
times  and  seasons  the  time-measurement  with  which  they  were 
connected. 

Months  and  Years. — Two  kinds  of  months  are  noticed  in  the 
Bible,- — the  lunar  months  and  those  of  thirty  days.f  The  em- 
ployment of  two  kinds  of  months,  to  have  been  at  all  practicable, 
must  require  a distinction  to  be  made  between  the  subject- 
matters  for  which  their  respective  dates  are  given.  In  ancient 


* Kitto’s  “ Biblical  Cyclopaedia,”  title  Day. 
t Gen.  vii.  11 ; viii.  3,  4 ; I.  Sam.  xx.  24,  27. 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


117 


times,  when  learning  was  confined  to  the  few,  it  made  no  differ- 
ence how  many  kinds  of  years  and  months  were  known  to 
those  specially  interested  in  the  measurement  of  time;  these 
concerned  not  the  great  mass,  and  wrought  no  confusion  in  the 
business  affairs  of  life.  The  common  people,  whenever  history 
has  retained  any  vestiges  of  their  habits  and  customs,  always 
measured  time  by  simple  ways,  which  had  been  suggested  by 
their  own  experience.  If  among  the  learned,  those  who  were 
interested  in  the  historical  past  of  a nation,  a year  peculiarly 
adapted  to  the  purposes  of  history  was  known  and  used  in  their 
annals,  it  is  in  no  way  inconsistent  with  the  employment  ot 
another  kind  of  year  for  agricultural  purposes.  Again,  the 
ordinances  of  festivals  to  bo  celebrated  on  specified  dates  were 
primarily  for  the  information  of  the  priests,  who  instructed  the 
people  in  the  requirements  of  the  law.  Under  such  a condition 
of  things  there  may  have  been  three  or  four  kinds  of  years  in 
use  among  the  Jews:  first,  the  agricultural  year,  regulated  by 
the  rising  of  stars  or  the  clearly-marked  beginnings  of  seed-time 
and  harvest;  second,  the  historical  year,  for  which  is  used  the 
vague,  because  of  its  special  adaptation  for  that  purpose ; third,  a 
luni-solar  and  a tropical  year,  these  two  being  used  by  the  priests 
for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  prescribed  dates  of  the  ritual. 

The  first  month  is  called  Abib,  and,  as  its  name  implies,  it 
was  the  month  of  the  beginning  of  harvest.  The  seventh 
month  is  Ethanim,  and  it  referred  in  a similar  way  to  the  time 
of  ploughing  and  planting.  The  months  were  also  numbered 
from  one  to  twelve,  and  were  more  commonly  spoken  of  as  the 
first,  second,  third,  etc.,  months.  If  we  understand  Abib  and 
Ethanim  to  be  used  in  connection  with  a solar  or  a luni-solar 
year,  they  may  be  taken  as  more  properly  to  be  the  names  of 
seasons  rather  than  of  months,  being  the  beginnings  of  spring 
and  autumn.  Before  the  captivity  the  names  of  only  two  other 
months  are  given.  These  are  Zif,  called  the  second  month,  and 
Bui,  the  eighth  month.  All  the  other  months  are  only  named 
by  numbers.  This  is  very  much  like  the  Roman  months.  In 
that  case  they  were  four,  which  were  called  Martius,  Aprilis, 
Maius,  Junius,  and  the  remaining  months  were  named  by 
numbers.  But  the  Jewish  names  differed  from  the  Roman  in 
their  order,  that  of  the  Romans  being  first,  second,  third,  and 


118 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


fourth,  and  the  Jewish  first,  second,  seventh,  and  eighth.  It 
has  occurred  to  me  that  perhaps  originally  these  were  the 
names  of  the  four  seasons,  or  primeval  divisions  of  the  year; 
and  when  the  year  was  divided  into  months,  the  old  four  names 
were  retained  in  the  Roman  year  as  so  many  successive  months, 
while  those  of  the  Jewish  year  were  applied  in  a slightly 
different  manner. 

Intercalations. — The  character  of  intercalations,  their  purpose 
and  standing  among  the  time-units,  has  been  treated  to  some 
extent  in  connection  with  the  technical  chronology  of  the 
Egyptians.  In  that  connection  philosophical  speculations  about 
them,  and  their  nature  as  holy,  or  days  for  religious  purposes, 
were  noticed. 

In  the  Jewish  system  the  holy  days  were  sabbaths,  in  which 
all  servile  work  was  forbidden,  and  with  these  may  also  be 
included  others,  which,  although  labor  was  not  prohibited,  were 
signalized  by  special  religious  observances,  they  partaking  more 
of  the  character  of  holidays.  Counting  from  one  equinox  to 
the  same  again,  the  number  of  daj’s  will  be  three  hundred  and 
sixty-five;  in  this  number  there  are  fifty-two  weekly  sabbaths. 
Besides  the  weekly,  they  observed  seven  other  special  or  annual 
sabbaths, — the  first  and  last  days  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread,  the  feast  of  Pentecost,  and  the  first,  tenth,  fifteenth,  and 
twenty-second  days  of  the  seventh  month.  Thus  they  kept 
every  year  fifty-nine  sabbaths,  or  days  forbidden  for  servile 
work.  In  addition  to  these,  the  first  of  every  month  was  sol- 
emnized by  the  blowing  of  trumpets  and  additional  sacrifices. 
Labor  was  not  interdicted  on  these  days,  save  that  of  the 
seventh  month,  which  has  already  been  counted  in  the  fifty- 
nine  sabbaths.  This  leaves  eleven  additional  days,  which  with 
the  others  gives  seventy  days  of  both  kinds. 

The  sabbath  as  a rest  from  labor  is  applied  in  the  Ten  Com- 
mandments to  explain  God’s  rest  after  the  six  days’  work  of 
creation,  as  analogous  to  the  weekly  day  of  rest.  There  are 
two  ideas  of  the  word  rest  in  connection  with  labor  or  some 
form  of  activity.  One  is  simply  quiescence,  and  the  other  re- 
cuperation. Without  going  into  any  distinction  more  subtile 
than  this,  it  can  be  seen  that  a rest  preceding  labor  may  have 
no  relation  to  it  save  that  of  time,  and  a rest  following  labor 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


119 


may  likewise  be  a purely  negative  state.  It  is  also  true  that  a 
rest  preceding  labor,  when  of  a recuperative  character,  stands 
in  that  relation  to  a previous  activity,  and  to  the  labor  which 
follows  as  a preparation  for  the  same.  The  two  aspects  of  this 
rest  are  found  in  its  nature  and  its  chronological  order. 

Applying  the  distinction  above  made  to  the  creation  of  the 
world,  we  have  the  quiescence  of  chaos,  followed  by  the  six 
days’  work  of  creation,  and  this  terminated  by  the  rest  of  the 
seventh  day.  Rest,  activity,  rest  are  repeated  in  this  order  in 
the  beginning,  development,  and  final  result  of  every  living  or- 
ganism. This  law  governs  all  life,  and  every  form  of  activity. 
In  creative  order,  darkness  precedes  light;  sleep,  wakefulness; 
death,  life.  The  Jews  in  harmony  began  their  days  at  sunset, 
the  time  for  rest  preceding  that  of  labor.  Adam  while  in  the 
garden  of  Eden  enjoyed  rest.  We  are  not  told  how  long  he  re- 
mained in  Eden,  but  from  analogy,  even  if  the  period  did  not 
correspond  with  a sabbatical  year,  it  was  like  it,  and  perhaps  its 
type.  Adam’s  creation  was  the  last  work  of  the  sixth  day,  and 
so  it  has  been  said  bis  first  day  on  the  earth  was  the  sabbath 
day.*  In  all  this  we  have  the  chronological  order  of  the  rest 
days  to  those  of  labor.  The  first  is  a sabbath,  then  follow  six 
days  of  labor,  and  the  eighth  is  a sabbath.  The  same  order  ap- 
plies to  the  sabbatical  week  of  years : the  first  year  was  sabbat- 
ical, then  followed  the  six  which  were  for  labor,  and  the  eighth 
year,  which  is  also  the  seventh  counting  from  the  first  of  the  six 
to  which  it  is  recuperative,  is  also  sabbatical.  It  now  remains 
to  show  how  this  doctrine  was  connected  with  the  subject  of 
intei’calations.  The  conditions  governing  primitive  man  are 
those  of  the  natural  year.  In  temperate  climes  the  season  of 
winter  is  a time  of  rest  to  the  earth.  In  a hot  climate  a similar 
rest  is  brought  about  by  the  intense  heat  of  summer.  One  law 
governs  all.  The  same  conditions  assert  their  law  upon  the 
physical  constitution  and  habits  of  men.  A case  in  point  is  fur- 
nished by  the  customs  of  certain  aborigines  of  America.  Vol- 
ume iii.,  “Documentary  History  of  New  York,”  contains  the 
“Description  and  First  Settlement  of  New  Netherland  (from 
Wassenaer’s  ‘Historievan  Europe’).”  The  writer  in  recount- 


* Sermon  xxv.,  Rev.  William  Ashmead. 


120 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


ing  the  customs  of  the  aborigines  says  they  had  a year  of  ten 
months.  “ Of  January  and  December  they  take  no  note,  being 
of  no  use  to  them.”  This  year  is  solar.  It  contained  ten 
months  and  an  intercalary  period  equal  to  about  two  months. 
Supposing  these  savages  desired  to  count  all  of  the  time.  They 
would  not  wish  to  do  this  unless  for  something  akin  to  an  his- 
torical purpose.  Two  ways  were  open  to  them, — either  to  add 
two  more  months  to  the  year,  or  to  begin  to  count  another  ten 
where  the  other  left  off.  That  they  were  more  likely  to  add  two 
months  than  to  count  another  ten  is  quite  doubtful.  It  is  known 
the  ancients  timed  their  agricultural  pursuits  by  the  risings  and 
settings  of  stars,  with  the  moon  as  subsidiary ; all  that  would 
be  necessary  would  be  the  numbering  the  moons  from  and  be- 
tween such  risings  and  settings.  This  year  satisfied  all  ordinary 
wants,  and  if  a year  of  ten  months  was  adopted  for  other  pur- 
poses it  in  no  way  interfered  with  the  agricultural  methods  of 
determining  time.  Certainly,  when  the  year  is  reckoned  by  the 
rising  and  setting  of  stars  at  certain  seasons  there  is  no  need  of 
a year  of  twelve  months.  As  one  writer  remarks,  “ For  pur- 
poses of  historical  denotation,  it  matters  not  what  method  of 
dividing,  arranging,  and  naming  the  portions  of  time  maj’'  be 
adopted,  provided  the  method  be  constant  and  the  information 
capable  of  rendering  an  answer  to  the  question,  How  long  ago  ?”* 
These  aborigines,  in  their  simple  and  animal-like  mode  of  living, 
obeyed  in  companionship  with  surrounding  nature  the  common 
law  of  the  season.  Taking  these  as  a sample  of  primitive  man, 
their  habits  may  be  compared  with  those  pi’oduced  by  the 
growth  of  civilization.  As  society  advances  in  refinement  the 
objects  to  obtain  wThich  labor  is  done  increase,  the  arts  multiply, 
and  the  consequence  is  labor  is  augmented  to  a corresponding 
degree.  The  old  law  of  rest  that  men  involuntarily  obeyed  is 
broken.  The  needs  of  society  are  now  changed.  Men  must 
labor  more  continuously,  and  consequently  the  time  of  rest  is  no 
longer  one  season,  but  separated  into  days,  and  these  arranged 
generally  among  those  given  to  labor.  To  the  Jew  the  com- 
mand came;  it  was  no  new  monition,  but  the  old  law  once 
obeyed : “ Six  days  thou  shalt  labor,  and  do  all  thy  work : But 


* Henry  Brown,  Kitto’s  “ Biblical  Cyclopaedia,”  title  Chronology. 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


121 


the  seventh  day  is  the  sabbath  of  the  Lord  thy  God : in  it  thou 
shalt  not  do  any  work.”  The  relation  of  the  number  of  days  of 
rest,  God’s  days,  to  those  of  labor  continues  the  same.  The 
whole  time  of  rest  may  be  put  at  two  months ; it  may,  accord- 
ing to  circumstances,  be  a little  more,  and  even  less.  The  Jew- 
ish year  has  been  shown  to  have  had  fifty-nine  sabbaths,  which 
is  the  number  of  days  in  two  lunar  months,  which  leaves  ten 
out  of  twelve  lunar  months  for  labor.  If  the  fifty-nine  sabbaths 
are  separated  from  the  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five 
days,  the  number  of  days  remaining  is  three  hundred  and  six, 
which  is  two  days  more  than  the  Romulian  year  of  ten  months, 
and  if  from  these  the  eleven  additional  days  which  complete  the 
seventy  of  the  Jewish  year  be  taken,  the  remainder  is  again  two 
hundred  and  ninety-five  days,  or  ten  lunar  months. 

Whether  the  Jews  made  use  of  a year  of  ten  months,  alluded 
to  here,  depends,  like  the  argument  in  favor  of  the  Komulian 
year,  by  its  effect  upon  chronology.  The  Jewish  tithing  was  a 
tenth  of  the  yearly  increase,  and  likewise  a tenth  was  the  king’s 
tax,  which  ai'e  as  much  evidences  of  a year  of  ten  months  as 
the  somewhat  similar  use  of  the  number  ten  by  the  Romans 
was  of  their  Romulian  year. 

Cycles. — The  system  of  Moses  is  found  in  the  fixed  yearly 
festivals  of  the  Jews,  their  place  in  the  year,  their  number  and 
duration,  and  other  details,  which  were  on  the  model  of  the 
time-measurement. 

These  festivals  were  weekly,  monthly,  yearly,  cyclical,  epochal, 
and  agricultural. 

The  weekly  festival  was  on  the  sabbath,  the  monthly  in  the 
beginning  of  the  month,  the  yearly  in  the  beginning  of  the 
month  that  commenced  the  year,  the  cyclical  every  seventh*  and 
fiftieth  year  (the  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years),  the  epochal  the 
great  annual  festivals  which  were  memorials  of  their  coming  out 
of  Egypt,  and  the  agricultural  the  festivals  of  harvest. 

The  Bible  account  of  those  connected  with  the  exodus  is  as 
follows  (Exodus  xi.  4,  5):  “And  Moses  said,  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,  About  midnight  will  I go  out  into  the  midst  of  Egypt: 
And  all  the  firstborn  in  the  land  of  Egypt  shall  die.”  (xii.  2) 

* The  seventh  beginning  the  count  with  the  morrow  after  a sabbath, 
but  the  eighth  including  both  extremes. 

11 


122 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


“ This  month  shall  be  unto  you  the  beginning  of  months : it 
shall  be  the  first  month  of  the  year  to  you.”  (xii.  3)  “ In  the 
tenth  day  of  this  month  they  shall  take  to  them  every  man  a 
lamb.”  (xii.  6-8)  “And  ye  shall  keep  it  up  until  the  fourteenth 
day  of  the  same  month : and  the  whole  assembly  of  the  congre- 
gation of  Israel  shall  kill  it  in  the  evening.  And  they  shall  take 
of  the  blood,  and  strike  it  on  the  two  side  posts  and  on  the  up- 
per door  post  of  the  houses.  . . . And  they  shall  eat  the  flesh  in 
that  night,  roast  with  fire,  and  unleavened  bread.”  (xii.  11,  12) 
“And  thus  shall  ye  eat  it;  with  your  loins  girded,  your  shoes 
on  your  feet,  and  your  staff  in  your  hand  ; and  ye  shall  eat  it  in 
haste : it  is  the  Lord’s  passover.  For  I will  pass  through  the 
land  of  Egypt  this  night,  and  will  smite  all  the  firstborn  in  the 
land.”  (xii.  14-18)  “And  this  day  shall  be  unto  you  for  a me- 
morial ; and  ye  shall  keep  it  a feast  to  the  Lord  throughout  your 
generations:  ye  shall  keep  it  a feast  by  an  ordinance  for  ever. 
Seven  days  shall  ye  eat  unleavened  bread.  . . . And  in  the  first 
day  there  shall  be  a holy  convocation,  and  in  the  seventh  day 
there  shall  be  a holy  convocation  to  you ; no  manner  of  work 
shall  be  done  in  them,  save  that  which  every  man  must  eat,  that 
only  may  be  done  of  you.  And  ye  shall  observe  the  feast  of 
unleavened  bread ; for  in  this  selfsame  day  have  I brought  your 
armies  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt:  therefore  shall  ye  observe  this 
day  in  your  generations  by  an  ordinance  for  ever.  In  the  first 
month,  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  month  at  even,  ye  shall  eat 
unleavened  bread,  until  the  one  and  twentieth  day  of  the  month 
at  even.”  (xii.  51)  “ And  it  came  to  pass  the  selfsame  day,  that 
the  Lord  did  bring  the  children  of  Israel  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt  by  their  armies.”  (xiii.  4)  “ This  day  came  ye  out  in  the 
month  Abib.” 

The  corresponding  feasts  of  the  seventh  month  are  given  as 
follows : (Leviticus  xxiii.  24)  “ In  the  seventh  month,  in  the  first 
day  of  the  month,  shall  ye  have  a sabbath,  a memorial  of  blow- 
ing of  trumpets,  a holy  convocation.”  (xxiii.  27)  “Also  on  the 
tenth  day  of  this  seventh  month  there  shall  be  a day  of  atone- 
ment: it  shall  be  a holy  convocation  unto  you ; and  ye  shall  af- 
flict your  souls.”  (xxiii.  32)  “ It  shall  be  unto  you  a sabbath  of 
rest,  and  ye  shall  afflict  your  souls : in  the  ninth  day  of  the 
month  at  even,  from  even  unto  even,  shall  ye  celebrate  your 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


123 


sabbath.”  (xxiii.  34-36)  “The  fifteenth  day  of  this  seventh 
month  shall  be  the  feast  of  tabernacles  for  seven  days  unto  the 
Lord.  On  the  first  day  shall  be  a holy  convocation : ye  shall 
do  no  servile  work  therein.  Seven  days  ye  shall  offer  an  offer- 
ing made  bj^  fire  unto  the  Lord ; on  the  eighth  day  shall  be  a 
holy  convocation  unto  you,  and  ye  shall  offer  an  offering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord  ; . . . ye  shall  do  no  servile  work  therein.” 
(xxiii.  39)  “In  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  when 
ye  have  gathered  in  the  fruit  of  the  land,  ye  shall  keep  a feast 
unto  the  Lord  seven  days : on  the  first  day  shall  be  a sabbath,  and 
on  the  eighth  day  shall  be  a sabbath.”  (xxiii.  41-43)  “ It  shall 
be  a statute  for  ever  in  your  generations  ; ye  shall  celebrate  it  in 
the  seventh  month.  Ye  shall  dwell  in  booths  seven  days;  all 
that  are  Israelites  born  shall  dwell  in  booths : That  your  gen- 
erations may  know  that  I made  the  children  of  Israel  to  dwell 
in  booths,  when  I brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt.” 

I.  The  tenth  day  of  the  first  month  on  which  the  paschal  lamb 
was  selected  pairs  with  the  day  of  atonement  on  the  tenth  day  of 
the  seventh  month.  These  are  properly  last  days,  or  days  at  be- 
ginnings. The  tenth  day  of  the  first  month  is  connected  with  the 
departure  from  Egypt,  the  end  of  the  servitude  there,  and  the 
beginning  of  the  nation  ; and  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month, 
besides  having  this  reference,  is  a day  of  atonement  for  that  which 
is  past,  and  naturally  closes  the  year.  It  is  not  meant  that  every 
year  closed  with  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  but  that 
this  is  an  epochal  day,  and  that  some  chronological  period  ended 
on  this  day.  The  jubilee  cycle  or  year  began  on  the  day  fol- 
lowing the  day  of  atonement  every  fiftieth  year. 

II.  The  feast  of  unleavened  bread  in  the  first  month  is  de- 
scribed as  lasting  seven  days,  from  the  15th  to  the  21st,  inclusive, 
the  first  and  seventh  days  being  sabbaths.  The  corresponding 
feast  of  tabernacles  in  the  seventh  month  is  described  also  as  of 
seven  days,  but  the  first  and  eighth  days  are  mentioned  as  sab- 
baths. In  the  case  of  the  first  month,  it  will  be  noticed,  the 
dates  of  the  first  and  concluding  days  of  the  feast  are  given, 
while  only  that  of  the  first  day  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles  is  on 
record.  This  omission  has  its  significance.  I find  the  explana- 
tion of  this  in  their  analogy  to  two  cycles,  or  rather  to  two  forms 
of  the  same  cycle.  I understand  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread 


124 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


to  be  in  the  form  of  a cycle  of  six  years,  the  first  day  referring 
to  the  fii’st  year  of  the  cycle,  and  the  seventh  day  to  the  first 
year  of  the  second'  or  following  cycle  of  six  years.  I also  under- 
stand the  feast  of  tabernacles  for  seven  days  to  be  in  the  man- 
ner of  a cycle  of  seven  years,  the  first  day  referring  to  the  first 
year  of  the  cycle,  and  the  eighth  day  to  the  first  year  of  a sec- 
ond cycle  of  seven  yeai's.  Both  extremes,  but  in  a different 
manner,  are  counted  : the  period  in  the  first  instance  is  six  years, 
in  the  second  seven  years.  In  the  first  the  numbers  are  six  and 
seven,  and  their  multiple  forty-two  years ; in  the  second,  the 
numbers  are  seven  and  seven,  and  their  multiple  forty-nine 
years.  The  reason  why  both  extremes  are  not  directly  counted, 
but  only  implied  in  the  description  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles, 
is  to  avoid  the  multiple  of  seven  and  eight,  the  cycle  intended 
being  one  of  forty-nine,  and  not  of  fifty-six  years. 

To  support  this  view  certain  technicalities  belonging  to  the 
art  of  forming  cycles  may  be  cited.  It  is  desirable,  when  pos- 
sible, that  the  system,  including  in  this  term  all  the  time-meas- 
ures, both  great  and  small,  should  have  one  common  model.  The 
divisions  of  the  smaller  time-units  are  repeated  in  the  larger, 
and  only  distinguished  from  them  by  the  addition  of  the  word 
“ great”  or  some  other  expression  equally  good  for  the  purpose 
of  identification  and  correlation.  The  sabbatical  week  of  years 
is  so  called  because  it  is  formed  on  the  model  of  the  week  of 
seven  days.  The  jubilee  year  was  a fiftieth  year,  as  the  feast  of 
Pentecost  was  a fiftieth  day.  Cycles  which  will  permit  of  it  are 
on  the  analogy  of  the  ordinary  year  divided  into  seasons, 
months,  and  days,  these  representing  great  periods  of  time.  In 
the  foregoing  discussion  I have  thought  the  days  of  the  feasts 
of  unleavened  bread  and  of  tabernacles  were  upon  the  model  of 
the  week  and  the  sabbatical  year. 

The  propriety  of  this  is  advanced  in  the  hypothesis  about  to 
be  set  forth  to  explain  the  jubilee  cycle  of  the  Jews. 

The  phenomena  of  the  solar  year  are  associated  with  these  festi- 
vals by  a tradition  or  custom  of  the  Jews,  and  perhaps  this  is  con- 
firmed, if  the  Lord’s  passover  had  its  celestial  symbol  in  the  cross- 
ing of  the  sun  from  the  south  to  the  north  side  of  the  equator. 

III.  The  feast  of  weeks  or  Pentecost  was  counted  from  such 
time  as  they  began  to  put  the  sickle  to  the  corn.  (Deut.  xvi.  9.) 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OP  THE  JEWS. 


125 


Notice,  here  nothing  is  said  about  the  equinox  or  the  full  moon. 
This  should  be  kept  in  mind,  because  after  the  captivity  with  a 
year  luni-solar  in  character,  the  fiftieth  day  was  reckoned  in 
reference  to  the  full  moon  of  Abib. 

When  they  first  put  the  sickle  to  the  corn  they  were  to  bring 
a sheaf  of  the  first  fruits  to  the  priest,  and  on  the  morrow  after 
the  sabbath  he  was  to  wave  it  before  the  Lord.  They  were  to 
count  from  the  morrow  until  seven  sabbaths  were  complete, — 
that  is,  forty-nine  days,  unto  the  morrow  after  the  seventh  sab- 
bath, the  fiftieth  day, — when  they  were  to  offer  a new  meat 
offering  unto  the  Lord.  (Leviticus  xxiii.  10-16.) 

IY.  The  Sabbatical  and  Jubilee  Years. — (Leviticus  xxv.  1-12) 
“ And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses  in  mount  Sinai,  saying, 
Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  When 
ye  come  into  the  land  which  I give  you,  then  shall  the  land 
keep  a sabbath  unto  the  Lord.  Six  years  thou  shalt  sow  thy 
field,  and  six  years  thou  shalt  prune  thy  vineyard,  and  gather 
in  the  fruit  thereof;  But  in  the  seventh  year  shall  be  a sabbath 
of  rest  unto  the  land,  a sabbath  for  the  Lord  : thou  shalt  neither 
sow  thy  field,  nor  prune  thy  vineyard.  That  which  groweth  of 
its  own  accord  of  thy  harvest  thou  shalt  not  reap,  neither  gather 
the  grapes  of  thy  vine  undressed ; for  it  is  a year  of  rest  unto 
the  land.  And  the  sabbath  of  the  land  shall  be  meat  for  you  ; 
for  thee,  and  for  thy  servant,  and  for  thy  maid,  and  for  thy 
hired  servant,  and  for  thy  stranger  that  sojourneth  with  thee, 
And  for  thy  cattle,  and  for  the  beast  that  are  in  thy  land,  shall 
all  the  increase  thereof  be  meat.  And  thou  shalt  number  seven 
sabbaths  of  yeai’S  unto  thee,  seven  times  seven  years ; and  the 
space  of  the  seven  sabbaths  of  years  shall  be  unto  thee  forty 
and  nine  years.  Then  shalt  thou  cause  the  trumpet  of  the 
jubilee  to  sound  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month,  in  the 
day  of  atonement  shall  ye  make  the  trumpet  sound  throughout 
all  your  land.  And  ye  shall  hallow  the  fiftieth  year,  and  pro- 
claim liberty  throughout  all  the  land  unto  all  the  inhabitants 
thei-eof:  it  shall  be  a jubilee  unto  you;  and  ye  shall  return 
every  man  unto  his  possession,  and  ye  shall  return  every  man 
unto  his  family.  A jubilee  shall  that  fiftieth  year  be  unto  you  : 
ye  shall  not  sow,  neither  reap  that  which  groweth  of  itself  in 
it,  nor  gather  the  grapes  in  it  of  thy  vine  undressed.  For  it  is 

11* 


126 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


the  jubilee;  it  shall  be  holy  unto  you:  ye  shall  eat  the  increase 
thereof  out  of  the  field.”  (xxv.  20-22)  “And  if  ye  shall  say, 
What  shall  we  eat  the  seventh  year?  behold,  we  shall  not  sow, 
nor  gather  in  our  increase : Then  I will  command  my  blessing 
upon  you  in  the  sixth  year,  and  it  shall  bring  forth  fruit  for 
three  years.  And  ye  shall  sow  the  eighth  year,  and  eat  yet  of 
old  fruit  until  the  ninth  year;  until  her  fruits  come  in  ye  shall 
eat  of  the  old  store.” 

They  were  to  sow  their  fields  and  prune  their  vineyards,  and 
gather  in  the  fruit  thereof  for  six  years,  but  the  seventh  was  to 
be  a sabbath  to  the  land,  when  all  this  was  forbidden.  The 
jubilee  year  followed  after  seven  sabbatical  years, — that  is,  a 
space  of  forty-nine  years, — and  it  is  described  as  a sabbatical 
year  with  additional  regulations,  such  as  the  manumission  of  all 
slaves  and  servants,  the  release  of  all  mortgaged  lands,  and  the 
return  of  houses  and  lands  sold  to  their  original  owners. 

Here  has  arisen  a difficulty.  Some  have  supposed  the  jubilee 
year  to  be  identical  with  the  last  year  of  the  seven  sabbatical 
Aveeks  of  years, — that  is,  Avith  the  forty-ninth  year;  holding  to 
this  view  contrary  to  the  express  statement  of  the  Bible,  that 
it  was  a fiftieth  year.  They  Avere  led  to  this  by  the  statements 
in  verses  20-22.  To  the  question  proposed,  What  should  they 
eat  the  seventh  year?  the  answer  is,  The  sixth  year  shall  be 
blessed  so  that  it  shall  bring  forth  fruit  for  three  years:  they 
Avere  to  sow  the  eighth  year,  and  eat  of  the  old  fruit  until  they 
had  reaped  the  harvest  of  the  ninth  year.  They  say,  If  the 
jubilee  year  followed  the  seventh  sabbatical,  or  forty-ninth  year, 
then,  two  sabbatical  years  coming  together,  a famine  would  be 
the  consequence,  and  there  is  no  record  of  any  such  disastrous 
result  following  the  observance  of  the  sabbatical  years.  In  this 
case  they  would  sow  and  eat  of  the  old  fruit  until  the  harvest 
of  the  tenth  year,  and  the  sixth  year  Avould  have  to  bring  forth 
fruit  for  four  years  instead  of  three.  The  misunderstanding  of 
the  Bible  on  this  point  is  one  of  the  curiosities  of  history.  All 
difficulty  is  removed  by  a very  simple  explanation.  It  is  sug- 
gested by  the  first  words  used  in  the  decree  : “ When  ye  come 
into  the  land  which  I give  you,  then  shall  the  land  keep  a sab- 
bath unto  the  Lord.”  This  may.  either  mean  the  first  year  in 
the  land  of  Canaan,  or  the  year  they  received  and  entered  upon 


TECHNICAL  CHEONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


127 


their  lands;  at  all  events,  the  command  was  not  obligatory  until 
circumstances  made  it  possible  to  be  obeyed. 

The  sabbatical  week  of  years  had  its  epoch,  and  that  epoch 
was  a natural  sabbatical  year.  The  first  year  in  Canaan  was 
of  this  character,  and  so  also  would  be  the  first  year  of  their 
settlement  upon  their  lands.  In  neither  case  are  six  years  of 
agricultural  labor  in  precedence;  still,  the  natural  sabbatical 
year  falls  in  a supposed  series  as  a seventh  or  rest  year.  This 
subject  has  been  already  treated  under  tbe  head  of  Inter- 
calations. 

The  language  used  in  Joshua  v.  11,  12,  is  descriptive  of  a 
sabbatical  year:  “They  did  eat  of  the  old  corn  of  tbe  land  on 
the  morrow  after  the  passover,  unleavened  cakes,  and  parched 
corn  in  the  selfsame  day.  And  the  manna  ceased  on  the  morrow 
after  they  had  eaten  of  the  old  corn  of  the  land  ; . . . but  they  did 
eat  of  the  fruit  of  tbe  land  of  Canaan  that  year.”  The  first 
year  is  sabbatical ; this  is  followed  by  six  years  of  labor,  and 
the  next  following  year,  which  is  the  seventh  counting  from  the 
first  of  the  six  of  labor,  is  sabbatical,  and  it  is  the  eighth  year 
counting  from  the  sabbatical  epoch,  the  first  sabbatical  year. 

See  how  simply  this  view  explains  the  supposed  difficulty  in 
Jeremiah  xxxiv.  8-14.  The  covenant  between  God  and  tbe  chil- 
dren of  Israel  as  to  the  part  of  the  latter  is  described  in  tbe 
fourteenth  verse : “ At  the  end  of  seven  years  let  ye  go  every 
man  his  brother  a Hebrew,  which  hath  been  sold  unto  thee ; 
and  when  he  hath  served  thee  six  years,  thou  shalt  let  him  go 
free  from  thee.”  Because  the  sei-vice  was  six  years,  and  they 
were  to  be  let  go  at  the  end  of  the  seventh  year,  some  have  re- 
sorted to  the  stupid  subtlety  of  supposing  the  seventh  year  to 
have  had  two  ends  like  a line,  and  that  the  end  of  the  seventh 
meant  the  beginning  end.  The  explanation  of  this  passage  lies 
in  the  view  already  given  of  the  sabbatical  period.  The  first 
year  was  sabbatical ; then  followed  six  years  of  labor,  completing 
a period  of  seven  years,  or,  as  it  was  called,  the  week  of  years. 
The  six  years  of  service  corresponded  to  the  six  years  of  labor, 
and  the  end  of  the  seventh  year  was  the  end  of  the  sixth  year 
of  labor;  therefore  at  the  end  of  this  year  the  six  years  of  ser- 
vice were  completed,  and  they  were  to  be  liberated  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  following  year,  which  was  sabbatical. 


128 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


We  may  conclude  from  all  this  that  there  were  two  methods 
of  counting, — one  referring  to  the  economic  regulations  of  the 
sabbatical  week  of  years,  and  the  other  to  an  epoch  or  begin- 
ning. 

In  counting  the  number  of  years  their  lands  were  to  be  culti- 
vated, their  usufruct  parted  with,  their  servitude  to. last,  the 
sabbatical  and  jubilee  years  were  the  termini,  or  afforded  the 
boundaries  at  which  these  terms  came  to  an  end.  Because  the 
land  was  to  rest  after  six  years  of  cultivation,  the  sabbatical 
year  becomes  an  adjunct  for  rest.  But  chronologically  they  are 
the  years  with  which  the  count  begins,  and  they  should  be  num- 
bered in  their  order, — first,  eighth,  fifteenth,  twenty-second, 
twenty-ninth,  thirty-sixth,  forty-third,  and  fiftieth  years. 

The  grouping  of  years  into  periods,  if  not  done  for  conven- 
ience of  counting  them  or  some  economy  into  which  time  enters 
as  an  element,  must  be  traced  to  an  astronomical  cause. 

The  seven  and  forty-nine  years  of  the  sabbatical  and  jubilee 
terms,  if  of  years  according  to  the  Egyptian  vague  or  Babylo- 
nian cycle,  do  not  contain  full  periods  of  lunar  or  sidereal  months 
nor  of  ti-opical  or  sidereal  years.  Forty -nine,  if  cyclic  in  itself, 
must  undergo  an  interpretation  different  from  what  is  commonly 
given  to  it.  If  we  turn  to  the  account  of  the  jubilee  cycle,  we 
find  it  was  announced  in  the  day  of  atonement.  This  was  at 
even  of  the  tenth  day  of  the  month,  for  the  jubilee  year  began 
with  the  eleventh  day  of  the  seventh  month.  The  jubilee  year 
and  an  eighth  sabbatical  year  were  identical ; therefore  the  eighth 
sabbatical,  which  should  have  had  its  beginning  on  the  1st  of 
the  seventh  month,  is  put  forward  ten  days,  and  a new  begin- 
ning is  made  with  the  11th  of  the  month,  which  when  it  arrives 
is  changed  to  the  first  day  of  the  same  month.  In  other  words, 
the  year  at  the  beginning  of  the  jubilee  is  intercalated  ten  days. 
The  period  to  which  this  intercalation  is  made  is  certainly  con- 
nected with  the  number  seven.  But  it  cannot  be  that  of  forty- 
nine  years  of  twelve  months,  because  in  this  time  the  tropical 
points  advance  in  the  vague  eleven  days,  twenty  hours,  plus. 
The  number  of  years  to  which  ten  intercalary  days  are  fitted  is 
that  of  forty-two,  in  which  time  the  advance  is  ten  days,  four 
hours,  plus.  The  portion  of  a day  is  omitted,  and  the  right  in- 
tercalation of  forty-two  vague  years  to  make  them  tropical  is 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OP  THE  JEWS. 


129 


ten  days.  This  will  make  the  average  length  of  each  year  about 
six  minutes  less  than  the  mean  tropical,  and  which  is  a nearer 
following  of  the  true  solar  year,  for  this  number  of  years,  than 
the  Gregorian  year  makes.  This  number  cannot  be  brought 
within  the  terms  of  the  forty-nine  sabbatical  years  unless  it  can 
be  shown  that  forty-nine  and  forty-two  stand  for  the  same 
period  of  time.  It  may  be  in  this  way:  The  sabbatical  years, 
being  a rest  to  the  land,  were  years  of  twelve  months;  they 
covered  seed-time  and  harvest.  The  same  necessity  does  not 
belong  to  the  other  years  of  the  cycle.  If  they  were  of  ten 
months,  then  the  sabbatical  week  of  years  contained  one  year 
of  twelve  months  followed  by  six  of  ten  months,  or,  in  all,  seven 
mixed  years.  Six  years  of  ten  months  contain  sixty  months, 
which  are  equal  to  five  years  of  twelve  months,  hence  the  seven 
mixed  years  equal  six  of  twelve  months.  Seven  times  six  of 
twelve  months  equal  forty-two  years,  which  equal  seven  times 
seven  mixed  years,  or  forty-nine  years.  It  may  now  be  under- 
stood what  was  meant  by  the  blessing  ou  the  sixth  }Tear,  that  it 
may  bear  fruit  for  three  years ; it  was  the  last  year  of  the  sab- 
batical cycle,  it  was  the  sixth  decimestrial  year  of  labor,  and  the 
last  and  sixth  year  of  the  cycle  as  of  years  of  twelve  months. 
Jeremiah  calls  this  last  year  the  seventh,  and  he  speaks  of  it  as 
of  seven  mixed  years,  if  the  above  explanation  is  correct.  In 
the  discussion  of  the  feasts  of  unleavened  bread  and  tabernacles 
this  condition  of  things  was  hinted  at.  The  feast  of  unleavened 
bread  was  for  seven  days,  the  first  and  last  days  of  which  were 
sabbaths ; so  by  the  week  of  six  years  we  have  first  year  a sab- 
bath, plus  five  years,  'plus  a sabbath,  seven  years  corresponding  to 
the  seven  days  of  the  feast.  The  feast  of  tabernacles  was  also 
for  seven  days ; it  corresponded,  in  some  way  which  did  not 
then  appear,  with  the  seven  days  of  the  feast  of  unleavened 
bread.  The  first  and  eighth  days  of  this  feast  were  sabbaths, 
so  by  the  week  of  seven  mixed  years  we  have  first  year  a sab- 
bath, plus  six  years,  plus  a sabbath.  The  six  years  are  equal  to 
five ; and  in  this  wTay  there  are  seven  years  corresponding  to  the 
seven  days  given  for  the  feast,  and  the  peculiar  phraseology 
which  asserts  it  was  for  seven  days,  and  yet  gives  the  first  and 
eighth  days  as  sabbaths,  is  explained  by  its  reference  to  the 
cycle  of  seven  mixed  years. 


130 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


The  following  exhibition  of  the  jubilee  cycle  contains  the  de- 
tail of  years  of  the  first  week  of  years  in  two  forms.  The  totals 
of  the  remaining  weeks  of  years  are  like  the  first,  except  the 
last,  which  has  ten  intercalary  days  added  at  its  end  : 


First  Week  of  Years. 

Babylonian  Year. 


Egyptian  Year. 


First 

year-day  equals  300  days. 

1 equals  365 

Second 

ll 

1 1 

ll 

300 

ll 

2 

li 

300 

Third 

ll 

it 

ll 

300 

ll 

3 

ll 

305 

Fourth 

ll 

it 

ll 

300 

ll 

4 

a 

305 

Fifth 

It 

u 

ll 

300 

ll 

5 

u 

305 

Sixth 

u 

it 

ll 

300 

ll 

6 

u 

305 

Seventh 

li 

a 

a 

300 

li 

7 

u 

305 

2190 

Intercalary 

month 

30 

li 

2190 

ll 

Egyptian  and  Babylonian. 

First  week  of  years  equals  2,190  days. 


Second  “ 

Third  “ 

Fourth  “ 

Fifth  “ 

Sixth  “ 

Seventh  “ 

Intercalary  days 


2,190 

2,190 

2,190 

2,190 

2,190 

2,190 

15,330 

10 

15,340 


The  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years  appear  to  have  been  disre- 
garded by  the  Jews  with  perhaps  one  or  two  exceptions.  In 
II.  Chronicles  xxxvi.  21  it  is  said  of  the  captivity  of  Babylon, 
it  was  “To  fulfil  the  word  of  the  Lord  by  the  mouth  of  Jere- 
miah, until  the  land  had  enjoyed  her  sabbaths  : for  as  long  as 
she  lay  desolate  she  kept  sabbath,  to  fulfil  threescore  and  ten 
years.” 

V.  Eponymous  Cycles. — Some  matters  will  be  repeated  here 
which  have  been  gone  over  in  connection  with  the  Egyptian 
system.  These  are  to  explain  the  number  forty,  which  is  so 
often  met  with  in  the  Jewish  lists. 

A cycle  may  be  a period  determined  by  the  occurrence  and 


TECHNICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


131 


repetition  of  astronomical  phenomena,  or  it  may  be  a division 
formed  for  the  convenience  of  counting,  following,  for  instance, 
the  decimal  system.  The  number  forty  has  two  significations: 
in  one  it  means  a period  of  forty  sidereal  years,  which  is  one- 
fourth  of  one  hundred  and  sixty  years,  this  last  being  a period 
in  which  the  sidereal  advances  forty-one  days  in  the  vague. 

The  decimestrial  year  is  used  to  divide  the  century  into 
three  or  four  parts  or  periods.  One  hundred  vague  years 
contain  twelve  hundred  months,  which,  divided  into  gen- 
erations, three  to  a century,  give  four  hundred  months  to 
each,  and  these  reduced  to  years  of  ten  months  give  forty  for 
each  third  of  a century.  By  the  lunar  month  twenty -five  vague 
years  are  one  hour  plus  longer  than  three  hundred  and  nine 
synods  of  the  moon.  These  divide  the  century  into  four 
seasons  or  generations  each  of  twenty-five  vague  years,  or  of 
thirty  decimestrial  lunar  years,  with  nine  intercalary  months 
added  at  the  beginning  of  each.  This  will  cause  twelve  hun- 
dred and  thirty-six  lunar  months  to  fall  short  of  a century  of 
vague  years  by  four  hours  plus.  These  when  divided  into 
generations,  three  to  a century,  will  give  four  hundred  and 
twelve  months  to  each,  and  these  are  represented  by  forty  deci- 
mestrial lunar  years  plus  one  (intercalary)  of  twelve  months. 
We  find  both  numbers  forty  and  forty-one  in  the  Bible,  and 
probably  in  some  instances  they  express  within  a few  hours  the 
same  periods  of  time.  These  were  eponymous  cycles.  One  of 
these  begins  with  the  judgeship  of  Othniel.  In  perusing  a list 
of  eponymous  cycles,  it  is  not  necessary  to  understand  that 
they  represent  the  number  of  years  each  eponym  was  actually 
in  authority.  He  may  have  been  a ruler  before  the  cycle  to 
which  he  gave  his  name  had  its  beginning ; also  he  may  die 
before  its  close,  and  it  is  possible  that  one  or  more  successors 
may  rule,  die,  or  lose  their  power  in  some  way  before  the  close 
of  the  same  cycle. 

The  list  of  eponyms,  unless  their  terms  are  very  short,  may 
not,  and  doubtless  never  does,  contain  a complete  roll  of  all  the 
rulers  for  the  period  it  covers.  What  constitutes  the  character 
of  the  eponym  is  the  official  part  performed  and  the  authority 
assumed  by  the  ruler  at  the  inauguration  of  the  cycle.  It  is  a 
small  matter  whether  Othniel,  Ehud,  and  the  other  judges, 


132 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


whose  terms  are  put  at  forty  years,  ruled  the  entire  terms  given 
them.  What  is  of  importance  to  be  known  and  insisted  upon 
is  that  time  can  just  as  accurately  be  measured  by  such  cycles 
as  by  years.  A year  is  no  more  than  a cycle  of  months,  a gen- 
eration is  a cycle  of  years,  and  eponyms  of  cycles  have  a chro- 
nological value  fully  as  good  as  eponyms  of  years.  The  effect 
of  this  view  upon  the  character  of  Jewish  chronology  from  the 
exodus  down  to  the  division  of  the  kingdom  is  of  some  conse- 
quence ; for  without  it  the  number  forty  is  relegated  to  the 
list  of  round  numbers,  or  averages,  and  is  deprived  of  its  his- 
torical verity. 

It  is  no  argument  against  the  eponymous  character  of  this 
number  as  found  in  this  first  portion  of  Jewish  history,  because 
of  the  circumstance  that  these  cycles  are  not  continuous.  This 
was  a period  of  great  confusion,  and  one  in  which  they  were 
frequently  in  captivity  to  neighboring  nations.  The  author  of 
the  chronology  made  up  the  list  in  part  of  eponymous  cycles, 
giving  to  each  eponym  forty  decimestrial  years,  and  in  part  of 
certain  times  of  captivity  given  in  years  of  twelve  months; 
also  the  terms  of  other  judges,  also  in  years  of  twelve  months, 
who  were  not  the  eponyms  of  cycles. 

But  to  the  objection  which  still  may  be  brought  forward  to  the 
list- containing  exactly  so  many  eponjmious  cycles,  and  the  cap- 
tivities of  being  of  exactly  so  many  years,  and  the  other  judges 
ruling  exactly  the  number  of  years  given  to  them,  as  being  in- 
credible, it  may  be  replied  : The  list  probably  does  not  contain  a 
full  roll  of  all  those  who  ruled  over  the  Jews  during  this  period. 
Some  of  these  are  omitted,  because  it  was  desirable  to  retain  the 
eponymous  cycles.  These  were  omitted  just  as  the  years  of 
Shamgar  were,  who  judged  Israel,  probably,  during  the  second 
eponym  of  Ehud,  because  his  term  fell  in  with  the  latter  part 
of  that,  and  terminated,  perhaps,  with  the  captivity  to  Jabin. 
In  the  same  way,  in  order  to  preserve  the  eponyms,  those  por- 
tions of  the  captivities  and  non-eponymous  judgeship>s  which  fell 
in  with  them  were  omitted.  In  this  way  the  integrity  of  the 
eponyms  is  preserved,  and  they  and  the  period  down  to  the  re- 
bellion of  Jeroboam  I.  are  confirmed  by  other  data,  which  will 
be  furnished  when  this  portion  of  the  history  comes  under  con- 
sideration. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  133 


CHAPTER  XI 1. 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 

The  historical  chronology  is  divided  into  two  parts.  The 
first  extends  from  the  exodus  to  the  reign  of  Rehoboam ; the 
second  part  completes  the  history. 

PART  I. 

From  the  Exodus  to  Rehoboam.  Chronological  Data. 

I.  Wanderings  in  the  Wilderness. — This  period  is  given  in 
Numbers  xiv.  33  as  forty  years.  It  is  a question  whether  these 
are  years  of  twelve  or  ten  months.  In  the  latter  case  they 
equal  thirty-three  and  one-third  years  of  twelve  months. 

II.  Division  of  Lands. — No  years  for  the  period  between  the 
crossing  of  the  Jordan  and  the  judgeship  of  Othniel  are  given 
in  the  Bible  except  the  eight  years  of  the  captivity  to  Mesopo- 
tamia, which  came  to  an  end  when  Othniel  became  judge. 
Some  find  a longer  period  than  the  eight  implied  in  the  book  of 
Joshua.  They  are  derived  from  Caleb’s  statement  of  his  own 
age  at  the  time  of  the  division  of  lands  (Joshua  xiv.  7,  10). 
He  was  forty  years  old  when  ho  and  his  companions  set  out 
from  Kadesh-barnea  to  spy  out  the  land,  and  he  is  now  eighty- 
five  years  old,  a period  of  forty-five  years  having  elapsed.  This 
places  the  division  of  lands  in  the  forty-seventh  year  of  the  ex- 
odus. The  two  schemes  affect  this  item,  for  by  one  the  years 
are  of  twelve  months,  and  by  the  other  of  ten  months. 

III.  Judgeship  of  Joshua. — Josephus  gives  Joshua  a judgeship 
of  twenty-five  years.  The  figures  seem  to  be  derived  from 
Caleb’s  statement,  because  they  make  Joshua  eighty-five  years 
old  at  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan,  which  was  the  age  of  Caleb 
at  the  division  of  lands.  The  two  schemes  are  so  arranged  that 
the  death  of  Joshua,  according  to  Scheme  I.,  is  fifteen  years 
(twelve  months)  after  the  death  of  Moses,  Scheme  II. 

12 


134 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


The  items  are  as  follows: 


1.  In  the  wilderness 

...  40 

years. 

N umbers 

xiv.  33 

2.  Captivity  to  Mesopotamia  . . . . 

...  8 

ti 

Judges  iii.  8 

3.  Othniel,  judge 

...  40 

n 

ll 

iii.  11 

4.  Captivity  to  Moab 

...  18 

it 

ll 

iii.  14 

5.  Eliud,  judge 

...  80 

a 

It 

iii.  30 

6.  Shamgar,  judge 

...  0 

It 

ll 

iii.  31 

7.  Captivity  to  Jabin 

...  20 

ti 

ll 

iv.  3 

8.  Deborah  and  Barak 

...  40 

it 

ll 

v.  31 

9.  Captivity  to  Midian 

...  7 

it 

ll 

vi.  1 

10.  Gideon 

...  40 

It 

ll 

viii.  28 

11.  Abimeleeh 

...  3 

ll 

ll 

ix.  22 

12.  Tola 

...  23 

ll 

ll 

x.  2 

13.  Jair 

...  22 

ll 

1 1 

x.  3 

14.  Captivitv  to  Philistia 

...  18 

a 

ll 

X.  8 

15.  Jephtliah 

...  6 

a 

ll 

xii.  7 

16.  Ibzan 

u 

ll 

xii.  9 

17.  Elon 

...  10 

u 

It 

xii.  11 

1 8.  Abdon 

...  8 

ii 

It 

xii.  14 

19.  Captivity  to  Philistia 

...  40 

it 

It 

xiii.  1 

The  years  Samson  judged  Israel  are  included  in  the  forty  years’  servi- 
tude to  Philistia.  “And  he  judged  Israel  twenty  years”  (Judges 
xvi.  31).  “ He  judged  Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Philistines  twenty 

years”  (Judges  xv.  20). 


20.  Eli,  judge 40  years.  I.  Samuel  iv.  18 

21.  Saul,  king 40  “ 


The  years  of  Saul  are  inferred  from  several  statements  in  the  Bible. 
The  description  of  Saul  in  I.  Samuel  ix.  2 is  “ A choice  young  man, 
and  a goodly.”  On  the  authority  of  those  best  able  to  decide  a ques- 
tion of  this  kind  this  meant  a young  man  of  age,  but  unmarried. 
“ Ish-bosheth,  Saul’s  son,  was  forty  years  old  when  he  began  to  reign 
over  Israel,  and  reigned  two  years”  (II.  Samuel  ii.  10). 

22.  David,  king 40  years.  I.  Kings  ii.  11 

“ Seven  years  reigned  he  in  Hebron,  and  thirty  and  three  years  reigned 

he  in  Jerusalem.” 

23.  Solomon 40  years.  I.  Kings  xi.  42 

24.  In  the  four  hundred  and  eightieth  year  after  the  children  of  Israel  were 

come  out  of  Egypt,  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign,  in  the  second 
month  Zif,  Solomon  began  to  build  the  house  of  the  Lord  (I.  Kings 
vi.  i).  In  the  Septuagint  version  this  period  is  put  at  four  hundred 
and  forty  years.  “ In  II.  Chronicles  iii.  2 (the  parallel  passage)  there 
is  no  date.  Josephus,  Theophilus,  and  others  who  have  left  systems 
of  chronology  seem  to  be  ignorant  of  this  computation,  which  is 
first  mentioned  in  the  fourth  century  by  Eusebius,  and  he  does  not 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


135 


adopt  it.”*  In  the  older  books,  such  as  Exodus,  Deuteronomy, 
Numbers,  Judges,  and  I.  Samuel,  a space  of  more  than  five  hundred 
years  may  be  counted  for  the  same  period.  No  effort  is  made  in  the 
Bible  to  explain  or  remove  the  difficulty.  The  consequence  is,  two 
opposing  views  are  held.  One  class  of  critics,  insisting  on  the  long 
chronology,  claims  the  statement  of  four  hundred  and  eighty  years  in 
I.  Kings  to  be  an  instance  of  corrupted  text.  Another,  advocating 
the  short  chronology,  insists  upon  the  retention  of  the  four  hundred 
and  eighty  years,  and  endeavors  to  harmonize  everything  by  sup- 
posing certain  terms  of  years,  especially  some  of  those  mentioned  in 
the  Book  of  Judges,  to  be  contemporaneous. 

1 do  not  propose  to  discuss  this  matter.  The  purpose  is  to  show  that 
the  numbers  as  they  stand  in  the  older  books  are  in  agreement  with 
the  period  of  four  hundred  and  eighty  years,  and  if  this  number  of 
years  was  inserted  into  the  text  at  a later  date  than  the  composition 
of  the  Books  of  Kings,  it  was  a result  derived  from  a computation 
and  interpretation  of  those  numbers. 


Chronological  Table. 

EXODUS  TO  THE  KEIONS  OE  RICHOBOAM  AND  JEROBOAM  I. 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Decimes- 

TRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1397 

1-  2 

Exodus  to  crossing  1 

Exodus  to  cross-  1-  2 

1396 

1 

2-  3 

of  the  Jordan.  2 

ing  of  tlie  Jor-  2-  3 

1395 

2 

3-  4 

3 

dan.  3-  4 

1394 

3 

4-  5 

4 

4-  5 

1393 

4 

5-  6 

5 

5-  6 

1392 

5 

7-  8 

6 

7-  8 

1391 

6 

8-  9 

7 

8-  9 

1390 

7 

9-10 

8 

9-10 

1389 

8 

10-11 

9 

10-11 

1388 

9 

11-12 

10 

11-12 

1387 

10 

13-14 

11 

13-14 

1386 

11 

14-15 

12 

14-15 

1385 

12 

15-16 

13 

15-16 

1384 

13 

16-17 

14 

16-17 

1383 

14 

17-18 

15 

17-18 

1382 

15 

19-20 

16 

19-20 

1381 

16 

20-21 

17 

20-21 

1380 

17 

21-22 

18 

21-22 

1379 

18 

22-23 

19 

22-23 

1378 

19 

23-24 

20 

23-24 

1377 

20 

25-26 

21 

25-26 

1376 

21 

26-27 

22 

26-27 

1375 

22 

27-28 

23 

27-28 

* “ The  Bible  Hand-Book”  (Angus),  p.  214. 


136 


JEWISH  CM  RONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Bra  op 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Decimes- 

TRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological 

Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1374 

23 

28-29 

24 

28-29 

1373 

24 

29-30 

25 

29-30 

1372 

25 

31-32 

26 

31-32 

1371 

26 

32-33 

27 

32-33 

1370 

27 

33-34 

28 

33-34 

1369 

28 

34-35 

29 

34-35 

1368 

29 

35-36 

30 

35-36 

1367 

30 

37-38 

31 

37-38 

1366 

31 

38-39 

32 

38-39 

1365 

32 

39-40 

33 

Death  of  Moses.  39-40 

1364 

33 

40-  1 

34 

Crossing  of  40-  1 

1363 

34 

1-  2 

35 

the  Jordan.  1-  2 

1362 

35 

3-  4 

36 

3-  4 

1361 

36 

4-  5 

37 

4-  5 

1360 

37 

5-  6 

38 

5-  6 

1359 

38 

6-  7 

39 

6-  7 

1358 

39 

7-  8 

Death  of  Moses.  40 

Division  of  7-  8 

1357 

40 

9-10 

Crossing  of  the  1 

lands.  Death  1 

1356 

41 

10-11 

Jordan.  2 

of  Joshua.  2 

1355 

42 

11-12 

3 

Captivity  to  3 

1354 

43 

12-13 

4 

Mesopotamia.  4 

1353 

44 

13-14 

5 

5 

1352 

45 

15-16 

6 

6 

1351 

46 

16-17 

Division  of  lands.  7 

7 

1350 

47 

17-18 

Death  of  Joshua.  1 

Othniel.  1-  8 

1349 

48 

18-19 

Captivity  to  Mes-  2 

1 

1348 

49 

19-20 

opotamia.  3 

2-  3 

1347 

50 

21-22 

4 

4 

1346 

51 

22-23 

5 

5 

1345 

52 

23-24 

6 

6 

1344 

53 

24-25 

7 

7 

1343 

54 

25-26 

Othniel.  1-  8 

8-  9 

1342 

55 

27-28 

2 

10 

1341 

66 

28-29 

3 

11 

1340 

57 

29-30 

4 

12 

1339 

58 

30-31 

5 

13 

1338 

59 

31-32 

6-  7 

14-15 

1337 

60 

33-34 

8 

16 

1336 

61 

34-35 

9 

17 

1335 

62 

35-36 

10 

18 

1334 

63 

36-37 

11 

19 

1333 

64 

37-38 

12-13 

20-21 

1332 

65 

39-40 

14 

22 

1331 

66 

40-  1 

15 

23 

1330 

67 

1-  2 

16 

24 

1329 

68 

2-  3 

17 

25 

1328 

69 

3-  4 

18-19 

26-27 

1327 

70 

5-  6 

20 

28 

1326 

71 

6-  7 

21 

29 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS, 


137 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  1)kci- 

ME8TRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1325 

72 

7-  8 

22 

30 

1324 

73 

8-  9 

23 

31 

1323 

74 

9-10 

24-25 

32-33 

1322 

75 

11-12 

26 

34 

1321 

76 

12-13 

27 

35 

1320 

77 

13-14 

28 

36 

1319 

78 

14-15 

29 

37 

1318 

79 

15  16 

30—3 1 

38-39 

1317 

80 

17-18 

32 

40-  1 Captivity  to 

1316 

81 

18-19 

33 

2 Moab. 

1315 

82 

19-20 

34 

3 

1314 

83 

20-21 

35 

4 

1313 

84 

21-22 

36-37 

5 

1312 

85 

23-24 

38 

6 

1311 

86 

24-25 

39 

7 

1310 

87 

25-26 

Captivity  lo  40-  1 

8 

1309 

88 

26-27 

Moab.  2 

9 

1308 

89 

27-28 

3 

10 

1307 

90 

29-30 

4 

11 

1306 

91 

30-31 

5 

12 

1305 

92 

31-32 

6 

13 

1304 

93 

32-33 

7 

14 

1303 

94 

33-34 

H 

15 

1302 

95 

35-36 

9 

16 

1301 

96 

36-37 

10 

17 

1300 

97 

37-38 

11 

18-  1 Ehud. 

1299 

98 

38-39 

12 

2 

1298 

99 

39-40 

13 

3 

1297 

100 

1-  2 

14 

4 

1296 

101 

2-  3 

15 

5 

1295 

102 

3-  4 

16 

6 

1294 

103 

4-  5 

17 

7 

1293 

104 

5-  6 

Ehud.  1-18 

8-  9 

1292 

105 

7-  8 

2 

10 

1291 

106 

8-  9 

3 

11 

1290 

107 

9-10 

4 

12 

1289 

108 

10-11 

5 

13 

1288 

109 

11-12 

6-  7 

14-15 

1287 

110 

13-14 

8 

16 

1286 

111 

14-15 

9 

17 

1285 

112 

15-16 

10 

18 

1284 

113 

16-17 

11 

19 

1283 

114 

17-18 

12-13 

20-21 

1282 

115 

19-20 

14 

22 

1281 

116 

20-21 

15 

23 

1280 

117 

21-22 

16 

24 

1279 

118 

22-23 

17 

25 

138 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

MESTRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1278 

119 

23-24 

18-19 

26-27 

1277 

120 

25-26 

20 

28 

1276 

121 

26-27 

21 

29 

1276 

122 

27-28 

22 

30 

1274 

123 

28-29 

23 

31 

1273 

124 

29-30 

24-25 

32-33 

1272 

125 

31-32 

26 

34 

1271 

126 

32-33 

27 

35 

1270 

127 

33-34 

28 

36 

1269 

128 

34-35 

29 

37 

1208 

129 

35  36 

30-31 

38-39 

1267 

130 

37-38 

32 

40 

1266 

131 

38-39 

33 

41 

1265 

132 

39-40 

34 

42 

1264 

133 

40-  1 

35 

43 

1263 

134 

1-  2 

36-37 

44-45 

1262 

135 

3-  4 

38 

46 

1201 

136 

4-  5 

39 

47 

1260 

137 

5-  6 

40 

48 

1269 

138 

6-  7 

41 

49 

1258 

139 

7-  8 

42-43 

50-51 

1257 

140 

9-10 

44 

52 

1256 

141 

10-11 

45 

53 

1255 

142 

11-12 

46 

54 

1254 

143 

12-13 

47 

55 

1253 

144 

13-14 

48-49 

56-57 

1252 

145 

15-16 

50 

58 

1251 

146 

16-17 

51 

59 

1250 

147 

17-18 

52 

60 

1249 

148 

18-19 

53 

61 

1248 

149 

19-20 

54-55 

62-63 

1247 

150 

21-22 

56 

64 

1246 

151 

22-23 

57 

65 

1245 

152 

23-24 

58 

66 

1244 

153 

24-25 

59 

67 

1243 

154 

25-26 

60-61 

68-69 

1242 

155 

27-28 

62 

70 

1241 

156 

28-29 

63 

71 

1240 

157 

29-30 

64 

72 

1239 

158 

30-31 

65 

73 

1238 

159 

31-32 

66-67 

74-75 

1237 

160 

33-34 

68 

76 

1236 

161 

34-35 

69 

77 

1235 

162 

35-36 

70 

78 

1234 

163 

36-37 

71 

79 

1233 

164 

37-38 

72-73 

80-  1 Captivity  to 

1232 

165 

39-40 

74 

2 Jabin. 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  139 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

MESTRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1231 

166 

40-  1 

75 

3 

1230 

167 

1-  2 

76 

4 

1229 

168 

2-  3 

77 

5 

1228 

169 

3-  4 

78-79 

6 

1227 

170 

5-  6 

Captivity  to  80-  1 

7 

1220 

171 

6-  7 

Jabin.  2 

8 

1225 

172 

7-  8 

3 

9 

1224 

173 

8-  9 

4 

10 

1223 

174 

9 10 

5 

11 

1222 

175 

11-12 

6 

12 

1221 

176 

12-13 

7 

13 

1220 

177 

13-14 

8 

14 

1219 

178 

14-15 

9 

15 

1218 

179 

15-16 

10 

16 

1217 

180 

17-18 

11 

17 

1216 

181 

18-19 

12 

18 

1215 

182 

19-20 

13 

19 

1214 

183 

20-21 

14 

20-  1 Deborah  and 

1213 

184 

21-22 

15 

1-  2 Barak. 

1212 

185 

23-24 

16 

3 

1211 

186 

24-25 

17 

4 

1210 

187 

25-26 

18 

5 

1209 

188 

26-27 

19 

6 

1208 

189 

27-28 

1-20 

7-  8 

1207 

190 

29-30 

Deborah  and  Ba- 2 

9 

1206 

191 

30-31 

rak.  3 

10 

1205 

192 

31-32 

4 

11 

1204 

193 

32-33 

5 

12 

1203 

194 

33  34 

6-  7 

13-14 

1202 

195 

35-36 

8 

15 

1201 

196 

36-37 

9 

16 

1200 

197 

37-38 

10 

17 

1199 

198 

38-39 

11 

18 

1198 

199 

39-40 

12-13 

19-20 

1197 

200 

1-  2 

14 

21 

1196 

201 

2-  3 

15 

22 

1195 

202 

3-  4 

16 

23 

1194 

203 

4-  5 

17 

24 

1193 

204 

5-  6 

18-19 

25-26 

1192 

205 

7-  8 

20 

27 

1191 

200 

8-  9 

21 

28 

1190 

207 

9-10 

22 

29 

1189 

208 

10-11 

23 

30 

1188 

209 

11-12 

24-25 

31-32 

1187 

210 

13-14 

26 

33 

1186 

211 

14-15 

27 

34 

1185 

212 

15-16 

28 

35 

140 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY, 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

MESTRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological 

Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Sclierao  II. 

1184 

213 

16-17 

29 

36 

1183 

214 

17-18 

30-31 

37-38 

1182 

215 

19-20 

32 

39 

1181 

216 

20-21 

33 

49-  1 Captivity  to 

1180 

217 

21-22 

34 

2 Midian. 

1179 

218 

22-23 

35 

3 

1178 

219 

23-24 

36-37 

4 

1177 

220 

25-26 

38 

5 

1176 

221 

26-27 

39 

0 

1175 

222 

27-28 

40-  1 

7-  1 Gideon. 

1174 

223 

28-29 

Captivity  to  2 

1 

1173 

224 

29-30 

Midian.  3 

2-  3 

1172 

225 

31-32 

4 

4 

1171 

226 

32-33 

5 

5 

1170 

227 

33-34 

6 

6 

1169 

228 

34-35 

1-  7 

7 

1168 

229 

35-36 

Gideon.  1-  2 

8-  9 

1167 

230 

37-38 

3 

10 

1166 

231 

38-39 

4 

11 

1165 

232 

39-40 

5 

12 

1164 

233 

40-  1 

6 

13 

1163 

234 

1-  2 

7-  8 

14-15 

1162 

235 

3-  4 

9 

16 

1161 

236 

4-  5 

10 

17 

1160 

237 

5-  6 

11 

18 

1159 

238 

6-  7 

12 

19 

1158 

239 

7-  8 

13-14 

20-21 

1157 

240 

9-10 

15 

22 

1156 

241 

10-11 

16 

23 

1155 

242 

11-12 

17 

24 

1154 

243 

12-13 

18 

25 

1153 

244 

13-14 

19-20 

26-27 

1152 

245 

15-16 

21 

28 

1151 

248 

16-17 

22 

29 

1150 

247 

17-18 

23 

30 

1149 

248 

18-19 

24 

31 

1148 

249 

19-20 

25-26 

32-33 

1147 

250 

21-22 

27 

34 

1146 

251 

22-23 

28 

35 

1145 

252 

23-24 

29 

36 

1144 

253 

24-25 

30 

37 

1143 

254 

25-26 

31-32 

38-39 

1142 

255 

27-28 

33 

40-  1 Abimelech. 

1141 

256 

28-29 

34 

2 

1140 

257 

29-30 

35 

1-  3 Tola. 

1139 

258 

30-31 

36 

2 

1138 

259 

31-32 

37-38 

3 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  141 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

MESTRIAI. 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1137 

260 

33-34 

39 

4 

1136 

261 

34-35 

40-  1 

5 

1135 

262 

35-36 

Abimelech.  2 

6 

1134 

263 

36-37 

1-  3 

7 

1133 

264 

37-38 

Tola.  1-  2 

8 

1132 

265 

39-40 

3 

9 

1131 

266 

40-  1 

4 

10 

1130 

267 

1-  2 

5 

11 

1129 

268 

2-  3 

6 

12 

1128 

269 

3-  4 

7-  8 

13 

1127 

270 

5-  6 

9 

14 

1126 

271 

6-  7 

10 

15 

1125 

272 

7-  8 

11 

16 

1124 

273 

8-  9 

12 

17 

1123 

274 

9-10 

13-14 

18 

1122 

275 

11-12 

15 

19 

1121 

276 

12-13 

16 

20 

1120 

277 

13-14 

17 

21 

1119 

278 

14-15 

18 

22 

1118 

279 

15-16 

19-20 

23-  1 Jair. 

1117 

280 

17-18 

21 

2 

1116 

281 

18-19 

22 

3 

1115 

282 

19-20 

23-  1 

4 

1114 

283 

20-21 

Jair.  1-  2 

5 

1113 

284 

2122 

2-  3 

6 

1112 

285 

23-24 

4 

7 

1111 

286 

24-25 

5 

8 

1110 

287 

25-26 

6 

9 

1109 

288 

26-27 

7 

10 

1108 

289 

27-28 

8-  9 

11 

1107 

290 

29-30 

10 

12 

1106 

291 

30-31 

11 

13 

1105 

292 

31-32 

12 

14 

1104 

293 

32-33 

13 

15 

1103 

294 

33-34 

14-15 

16 

1102 

295 

35-36 

16 

17 

1101 

296 

36-37 

17 

18 

1100 

297 

37-38 

18 

19 

1099 

298 

38-39 

19 

20 

1098 

299 

39-40 

20-21 

21 

1097 

300 

1-  2 

Captivity  to  22 

22-  1 Captivity  to 

1096 

301 

2-  3 

Philistia. 

2 Philistia. 

1095 

302 

3-  4 

3 

1094 

303 

4-  5 

4 

1093 

304 

5-  6 

5 

1092 

305 

7-  8 

6 

1091 

306 

8-  9 

7 

142 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cyci.es  of 
Forty  1)E0I- 

HF.STKIAL 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1090 

307 

9-10 

8 

1089 

308 

10-11 

9 

1088 

309 

11-12 

10 

1087 

310 

13-14 

11 

1086 

311 

14-15 

12 

1083 

312 

15-16 

13 

1084 

313 

16-17 

14 

1083 

314 

17-18 

15 

1082 

315 

19-20 

16 

1081 

316 

20-21 

17 

1080 

317 

21-22 

1-18  Jepbthah. 

1079 

318 

22-23 

2 

1078 

319 

23-24 

3 

1077 

320 

25-26 

4 

1076 

321 

26-27 

5 

1075 

322 

27-28 

6-  1 Ibzan. 

1074 

323 

28-29 

2 

1073 

324 

29-30 

3 

1072 

325 

31-32 

4 

1071 

326 

32-33 

5 

1070 

327 

33-34 

6 

1069 

328 

34-35 

1-  7 Elon. 

1068 

329 

35-36 

2 

1067 

330 

37-38 

3 

1066 

331 

38-39 

4 

1065 

332 

39-40 

5 

1064 

333 

40-  1 

6 

1063 

334 

1-  2 

7 

1062 

335 

3-  4 

8 

1061 

336 

4-  5 

9 

1060 

337 

5-  6 

10-  1 Abdon. 

1059 

338 

6-  7 

2 

1058 

339 

7-  8 

3 

1057 

340 

9-10 

4 

1056 

341 

10-11 

5 

1055 

342 

11-12 

6 

1054 

343 

12-13 

7 

1053 

344 

13-14 

Samson. 

1-  8 Captivity  to 

1052 

345 

15-16 

2 Philistia. 

1051 

346 

16-17 

3 

1050 

347 

17-18 

4 

1049 

348 

18-19 

5 

1048 

349 

19-20 

6-  7 

1047 

350 

21-22 

8 

1046 

351 

22-23 

9 

1045 

352 

23-24 

10 

1044 

353 

24-25 

11 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  143 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

ErtA  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

M E-TRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological 

Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

1043 

354 

25  26 

12-13 

1042 

355 

27-28 

14 

1041 

356 

28-29 

15 

1040 

357 

29-30 

10 

1039 

358 

30-31 

17 

1038 

359 

31  32 

18-19 

1037 

300 

33-34 

20 

1030 

301 

34-36 

21 

1035 

362 

35-30 

22 

1034 

303 

30-37 

23 

1033 

364 

37-38 

21-25 

1032 

365 

39-40 

20 

1031 

360 

40-  1 

27 

1030 

367 

1-  2 

28 

1029 

308 

2-  3 

29 

1028 

309 

3-  4 

30-31 

1027 

370 

5-  6 

82 

1026 

371 

6-  7 

33 

10251 

372 

7-  8 

34 

1025/ 

373 

8-  9 

35 

1024 

374 

9 10 

36-37 

1023 

375 

11-12 

38 

1022 

370 

12-13 

39 

1021 

377 

13-14 

10-  1 Eli. 

1020 

378 

14-15 

1 

1019 

379 

15-16 

2-  3 

1018 

380 

17-18 

4 

1017 

381 

18-19 

5 

1010 

382 

19-20 

0 

1015 

383 

20-21 

7 

1014 

384 

21-22 

8-  9 

1013 

385 

23-24 

10 

1012 

386 

24-25 

11 

1011 

387 

25-20 

12 

1010 

388 

20-27 

13 

1009 

389 

27-28 

14-15 

1008 

390 

29-30 

10 

1007 

391 

30-31 

17 

1000 

392 

31-32 

18 

1005 

393 

32-33 

19 

1004 

394 

33-34 

20-21 

1003 

395 

35-30 

22 

1002 

396 

30-37 

23 

1001 

397 

37-38 

24 

1000 

398 

38-39 

25 

999 

399 

39-40 

20-27 

998 

400 

1-  2 

28 

144 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 
MESTRIAL 
Years. 

Chronological 

Arrangement. 

Scheme  X. 

Scheme  II. 

997 

401 

2-  3 

29 

996 

402 

3-  4 

30 

995 

403 

4-  5 

31 

994 

404 

5-  6 

32-33 

993 

405 

7-  8 

34 

992 

406 

8-  9 

35 

991 

407 

9-10 

36 

990 

408 

10-11 

37 

989 

409 

11-12 

38-39 

988 

410 

13-14 

40-  1 Saul. 

987 

411 

14-15 

1 

986 

412 

15-16 

2 

985 

413 

16-17 

3 

984 

414 

17-18 

4-  5 

983 

415 

19-20 

6 

982 

416 

20-21 

7 

981 

417 

21-22 

8 

980 

418 

22-23 

9 

979 

419 

23-24 

10-11 

978 

420 

25-26 

12 

977 

421 

26-27 

13 

976 

422 

27-28 

14 

975 

423 

28-29 

15 

974 

424 

29  30 

16-17 

973 

425 

31-32 

18 

972 

426 

32-33 

19 

971 

427 

33-34 

20 

970 

428 

34-35 

21 

969 

429 

35-36 

22-23 

968 

430 

37-38 

24 

967 

431 

38-39 

25 

966 

432 

39-40 

26 

965 

433 

40-  1 

27 

964 

434 

1-  2 

28-29 

963 

435 

3-  4 

30 

962 

436 

4-  5 

31 

961 

437 

5-  6 

32 

960 

438 

6-  7 

33 

959 

439 

7-  8 

34-35 

958 

440 

9-10 

36 

957 

441 

10-11 

37 

956 

442 

11-12 

38 

955 

443 

12-13 

39 

954 

444 

13-14 

40-  1 David. 

953 

445 

15-16 

2 

952 

446 

16-17 

3 

951 

447 

17-18 

4 

TIIE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


145 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Deci- 

M I-  STRIA L 

Years. 

Chronological  Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  TT. 

950 

448 

18-19 

5 

949 

449 

19-20 

6-  7 

948 

450 

21-22 

8 

947 

451 

22-23 

9 

940 

452 

23-24 

10 

945 

453 

24-25 

11 

944 

454 

25-26 

12-13 

943 

455 

27-28 

14 

942 

450 

28-29 

15 

941 

457 

29-30 

16 

940 

458 

30-31 

17 

939 

459 

31-32 

18-19 

938 

460 

33-34 

20 

937 

401 

34-35 

21 

930 

402 

35-36 

22 

935 

403 

36-37 

23 

934 

404 

37  38 

24-25 

933 

405 

39-40 

26 

932 

400 

40-  1 

27 

931 

407 

1-  2 

28 

930 

408 

2-  3 

29 

929 

409 

3-  4 

30-31 

928 

470 

5-  6 

32 

927 

471 

0-  7 

33 

920 

472 

7-  8 

34 

925 

473 

8-  9 

35 

924 

474 

9-10 

36-37 

923 

475 

11-12 

38 

922 

470 

12-13 

39 

921 

477 

13-14 

40-  1 Solomon. 

920 

478 

14-15 

1 

919 

479 

15-16 

2-  3 

918 

480 

17-18 

Foundation  of  the 

4 

917 

481 

18-19 

temple. 

5 

910 

482 

19-20 

6 

915 

483 

20-21 

7 

914 

484 

21-22 

8-  9 

913 

485 

23-24 

10 

912 

480 

24-25 

11 

911 

487 

25-26 

12 

910 

488 

26-27 

13 

909 

489 

27-28 

14-15 

908 

490 

29-30 

10 

907 

491 

30-31 

17 

900 

492 

31-32 

18 

905 

493 

32-33 

19 

904 

494 

33-34 

20-21 

13 


146 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Taber- 
nacle. 

Cycles  of 
Forty  Dkci- 

MF.STRIAL 

Years. 

Chronological 

Arrangement. 

Scheme  I. 

Scheme  II. 

903 

495 

35-36 

22 

902 

496 

36-37 

23 

901 

497 

37-38 

24 

900 

498 

38-39 

25 

899 

499 

39  40 

26-27 

898 

500 

1-  2 

28 

897 

501 

2-  3 

29 

896 

502 

3-  4 

30 

895 

503 

4-  5 

31 

894 

504 

5-  6 

32-33 

893 

505 

7-  8 

34 

892 

506 

8-  9 

35 

891 

507 

9-10 

36 

890 

508 

10-11 

37 

889 

509 

11-12 

38-39 

888 

510 

13 

40 

A few  explanations  may  make  clear  this  table.  It  displays 
two  schemes  of  the  chronology  from  the  exodus  down  to  the 
captivity  to  Philistia,  b.c.  1097,  where  the  two  coincide.  Scheme 
I.  reckons  the  wanderings  in  the  wilderness  as  in  years  of  twelve 
months.  Scheme  II.  reckons  these  as  in  years  of  ten  months. 
Scheme  I.  places  the  division  of  lands  in  the  forty-seventh  year 
of  the  exodus  (twelve  months).  Scheme  II.  places  the  division 
of  lands  in  the  forty-seventh  year  of  the  exodus  (ten  months). 
Scheme  I.  places  the  captivity  to  Mesopotamia  in  b.c.  1350,  and 
Scheme  II.  terminates  that  captivity  in  that  year.  Scheme  I. 
reckons  all  the  items  of  forty  years  beginning  with  that  of  the 
judgeship  of  Othniel  as  of  years  of  ten  months,  also  the  judge- 
ships  of  Tola,  twenty-three  years,  and  Jair,  twenty-two  years, 
are  so  reckoned.  It  is  believed  that  the  three  items  beginning 
with  Tola  and  ending  with  the  captivity  to  Philistia,  eighteen 
years,  may  denote  so  many  cycles  of  the  return  of  the  same 
eclipses ; that  is,  fifty-four  years,  the  first  two  of  which  are  in 
decimestrial  years.  Scheme  II.  reckons  the  period  down  to  the 
captivity  of  Mesopotamia  in  decimestrial  years ; also  all  items 
of  forty  years  as  ten-month  years.  All  other  items  in  both 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  147 


schemes  are  in  years  of  twelve  months.  The  decimestrial  year  is 
in  cycles  of  six  years,  equal  to  five  of  twelve  months.  For  every 
five  years  counted  from  the  era  they  fall  as  in  the  following  table  : 

Years  of  Twelve  . „ .. 

Months  Decimestrial  Years  in  Months. 

1 (Year  1)  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  (Year  2)  11,  12, 

2 1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  8,  (Year  3)  9,  10,  11,  12, 

3 1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  (Year  4)  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  12, 

4 1,  2,  3,  4,  (Year  5)  5,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  12, 

5 1,  2,  (Year  6)  3,  4,  5,  0,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  12. 

The  chronological  table  gives  every  year  of  each  ruler,  and 
captivity,  which  causes  the  last  year  of  a preceding  item  to 
overlap  the  first  year  of  a succeeding  one.  The  decimestrial 
years  follow  the  Jewish  vague  year,  which  in  n.c.  1397  began 
on  April  2,  the  day  of  the  vernal  equinox.  Only  nine  months 
and  five  days  of  the  Jewish  vague  year  fell  in  b.c.  1397,  hence 
the  first  decimestrial  year  fell  partly  in  b.c.  1396.  The  table  does 
not  show  this,  but  simply  designates  the  decimestrial  years  corre- 
sponding  to  the  vague  years  as  found  in  the  column  headed  Era 
of  Tabernacle.  The  Julian  epochs  in  the  first  column  are  only 
for  the  beginning  of  the  vague  year. 

The  astronomical  knowledge  of  the  Jews  fully  equalled  that 
of  the  same  class  in  the  surrounding  nations.  I am  aware  the 
opposite  of  this  opinion  is  held.  Special  mention  of  astronomi- 
cal matters  are  absent  from  the  Bible.  There  are  found  only  a 
few  allusions  to  this  subject,  made  in  a more  or  less  obscure 
way ; but  these,  when  given  the  consideration  due  them,  point  to 
a not  inferior  knowledge  of  these  matters.  The  Jews  possessed 
truer  knowledge  of  the  length  of  the  solar  year  than  that  usu- 
ally ascribed  to  the  ancients,  and  it  is  proposed  to  be  made  evi- 
dent, in  the  course  of  this  work,  that  they  were  not  only 
acquainted  with  the  sidereal  cycle,  the  knowledge  of  which  is 
generally  accredited  to  the  Egyptians,  but  also  that  their 
knowledge  of  eclipses  and  their  chronological  use  was  fully  up 
to  that  of  the  world-famed  Chaldean. 

In  the  review  just  made  of  the  ordinances  establishing  the 
great  historical  festivals,  thei’e  was  found  in  connection  with 
them  no  direct  intimation  of  the  time  of  the  year  at  which  the 
exodus  took  place,  or  any  allusion  to  the  place  of  the  moon  at 
the  time  of  that  event.  That  the  event  took  place  about  the 


148 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


time  of  the  vernal  equinox  is  agreeable  to  tradition.  This  is 
also  implied  in  the  Bible.  In  I.  Chronicles  xii.  15  occurs, 
“ These  are  they  that  went  over  Jordan  in  the  first  month,  when 
it  had  overflown  all  its  banks  ; and  they  put  to  flight  all  them 
of  the  valleys,  both  toward  the  east,  and  toward  the  west.” 
In  Judea  the  former  rains  fall  in  October  and  November;  the 
latter  rains  in  March  and  April.  “It  is  owing  to  these  latter 
rains  that  Jordan  in  the  first  month  annually  overflows  its 
banks  at  the  season  of  barley  harvest;  and  the  reason  why  it 
overflows  them  only  once  in  the  year  is,  that  when  the  former 
rains  fell  the  ground  was  so  parched  by  the  summer’s  drought 
that  they  scarcely  quenched  its  thirst,  but  having  been  satu- 
rated at  times  with  plentiful  showers  during  the  winter,  those 
surplus  portions  of  the  latter  rain  which  fall  in  the  spring 
naturally  empty  themselves  into  the  river,  and  carry  it  along  at 
full  flood.”*  The  passage  of  the  Jordan  alluded  to  in  I.  Chroni- 
cles was  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  first  month.  This  implies  the 
Lord’s  passover  was  about  at  the  time  of  the  vernal  equinox. 

I have  been  led  by  many  considerations,  which  from  time  to 
time  will  be  unfolded  in  the  course  of  this  inquiry,  to  regard 
the  vague  year  as  the  chronological  year  of  the  Jews.  While 
holding  this  view,  I do  not  intend  thereby  to  advocate  the 
exclusion  of  other  forms  of  years  for  other  purposes,  or  for  the 
same  purpose  at  other  times.  According  to  my  reckoning,  from 
the  exodus  to  the  end  of  the  Babylonian  captivity  was  a period 
of  nine  hundred  years.  This  many  tropical  years  are  exactly 
seven  days  shorter  than  the  same  number  of  Julian  years,  and 
two  hundred  and  eighteen  days  longer  than  a like  number  of 
vague  years.  So  it  is  a matter  of  no  great  moment  whether  the 
chronological  year  be  a vague,  a tropical,  or  a Julian  year.  The 
tables  will  not  differ  more  than  one  year  if  any  of  these  years 
are  used.  But  if  it  can  be  shown  that,  by  the  use  of  the  vague 
year  for  this  purpose,  certain  events  connected  with  astronomi- 
cal phenomena,  widely  separated  by  years,  are  brought  to  the 
month,  and  even  the  day  of  the  month,  in  which  they  may  be 
believed  to  have  happened,  it  is  certainly  in  favor  of  the  vague 
year.  This  I propose  to  do. 


*“  Antiquities  of  the  Jews”  (William  Brown),  vol.  ii.  pp.  432,  433. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  149 


The  epoch  of  the  exodus  was  the  beginning  of  the  Jewish 
nation.  It  had  the  essential  political  elements,  but  the  old 
chronological  systems  required,  in  addition,  that  there  should 
be  in  connection  with  the  method  of  measuring  time  a proper 
astronomical  beginning.  The  epoch  was  often  marked  by  the 
erection  of  a monument  or  temple  of  stone  with  a suitable  in- 
scription as  a memorial.  This  was  not  always  done,  circum- 
stances and  emergencies  preventing  or  producing  some  other 
way  of  accomplishing  the  same  result.  In  the  case  of  the  Jews 
the  feasts  of  unleavened  bread  and  tabernacles  are  ordered  to 
be  observed  as  memorials  of  their  coming  out  of  Egypt.  If  the 
political  epoch  was  unaccompanied  with  phenomena  proper  to 
a new  beginning,  the  chronologer  would,  while  reckoning  from 
the  political  epoch,  conform  the  year  to  the  condition  of  things 
existing  at  another  time,  because,  as  they  governed  the  meas- 
urement of  time  by  observation  of  the  celestial  bodies,  these 
must  have  their  influence  upon  the  year.  In  this  way  there 
will  be  tAVO  or  more  epochs:  one  kind  political,  by  which  will 
be  reckoned  the  number  of  years,  and  the  other  astronomi- 
cal, by  which  the  years  will  bo  begun.  A case  in  point,  to  illus- 
trate two  epochs  in  connection  with  one  reckoning  of  years,  is 
the  celebrated  era  of  the  battle  of  Actium.  This  era  began 
with  the  1st  of  Thoth ; the  battle  was  fought  on  the  2d  of  Sep- 
tember, but  the  legal  1st  of  Thoth  in  connection  with  the  era 
fell  on  the  29th  of  August. 

The  epoch  of  the  exodus  is  in  dispute.  There  are  those  Avho 
affirm  that  the  older  Jews  never  had  a chronological  epoch. 
The  only  recognized  instance  of  such  a thing,  they  claim,  is 
found  in  connection  with  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s  temple  in 
the  four  hundred  and  eightieth  year  after  the  exodus.  But  this 
statement  in  I.  Kings  is  not  universally  admitted  to  have  be- 
longed to  the  original  record,  some  claiming  it  to  be  the  compu- 
tation of  a redacteur.  The  expression  “Exodus  of  the  Jews” 
properly  covers  all  the  period  of  their  journeying  previous  to 
their  settlement  upon  their  lands.  But  it  is  not  always  synon- 
ymous Avith  other  expressions  used ; that  is,  it  does  not  have 
the  same  limitations.  Indeed,  it  is  a question  Avhat  time  is 
meant  by  the  phrase  in  I.  Kings  vi.  1,  “ the  four  hundred  and 
eightieth  year  after  the  children  of  Israel  were  come  out  of  the 

13* 


150 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


land  of  Egypt.”  The  Samaritan  version  of  the  Bible  differs 
from  the  Hebrew  in  the  year  of  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s 
temple,  giving  for  that  year  440  instead  of  480.  This  would 
seem  to  imply  that  whoever  inserted  440  into  that  text  counted 
the  time  from  the  crossing  of  Jordan,  regarding  all  previous  to 
that  as  still  passed  in  Egypt.  In  favor  of  such  a view,  we 
might  well  inquire  upon  what  grounds  are  based  our  notions  of 
the  boundaries  of  ancient  Egypt.  At  the  close  of  the  twelfth 
dynasty,  “The  domination  of  the  Egyptian  sceptre  was  vigor- 
ously maintained  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai.  Officials  of  the 
king,  supported  by  a large  military  force,  maintained  the  Pha- 
raonic sovereignty  in  the  mountains  of  the  land  of  Maf  kat.”* 
In  the  time  of  Eameses  III.  we  find  that  “ distinguished  officials 
went  thither  on  the  king’s  commission,  to  bring  to  the  treasuries 
of  Pharaoh  the  much-prized  greenish-blue  copper-stone  [Mafka 
turquoises ?].”f  It  is  from  the  gloomy  recesses  of  Sinai,  and  in 
the  vast  wilderness  of  Paran  that  the  children  of  Israel  disap- 
pear from  view  to  emerge  in  the  fortieth  3’ear,  and  cross  the 
brook  Zered  thirty-eight  years  after  their  departure  from  Ka- 
desh-barnea.  Further,  the  writer  of  the  number  480,  having  in 
mind  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s  temple,  may  have  reckoned 
from  the  epoch  of  the  raising  of  the  tabernacle,  to  take  the 
place  of  which  Solomon’s  temple  was  built.  I propose  to  con- 
sider this  year,  the  four  hundred  and  eightieth,  to  be  counted 
from  the  era  of  the  tabernacle.  The  tabernacle  was  reared  up 
“ in  the  first  month  in  the  second  year,  on  the  first  day  of  the 
month.”  The  era  begins  with  the  second  year  of  the  Lord’s 
passover  in  Egypt,  and  the  years  reckoned  from  it  will  be  one 
less  than  those  counted  from  the  era  of  the  passover.  The  jTear 
of  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s  temple  is  the  four  hundred  and 
eightieth  of  the  era  of  the  tabernacle,  the  four  hundred  and 
eighty-first  of  the  era  of  the  passover,  and  the  four  hundred 
and  eightieth  after  the  children  of  Israel  were  come  out  of 
Egjrpt,  for  “on  the  twentieth  day  of  the  second  month,  in  the 
second  year,  that  the  cloud  was  taken  up  from  off  the  tabernacle 
of  the  testimony.  And  the  children  of  Israel  took  their  jour- 


*“  Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  chap.  ix.  p.  174. 
Eng.  trans.  f Ibid.,  vol.  ii.  chap.  xv.  p.  143.  Eng.  trans. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OP  THE  JEWS.  151 

neys  out  of  the  wilderness  of  Sinai ; and  the  cloud  rested  in  the 
wilderness  of  Paran.” 

There  are  several  times  in  the  first  forty-eight  years  of  the 
history  suitable  for  eras.  The  following  will  be  noticed:  The 
eras  of  the  passover  and  the  tabernacle  ; the  epochs  of  tbe  de- 
parture from  Sinai,  of  Othniel,  and  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s 
temple.  In  choosing  eras  connected  with  the  exodus,  the  fixed 
dates  of  the  Jewish  festivals  should  fall  naturally  in  their 
places.  The  holy  days  of  these  feasts  were  the  10th,  15th, 
and  21st  of  the  month,  which  were  to  be  observed  as  me- 
morials of  their  coming  out  of  Egypt.  If  the  practice  was  to 
erect  monuments  of  stone  to  commemorate  an  important  event, 
giving  also  some  indication  of  the  time,  in  order  to  establish 
such  as  memorials  of  epochs,  then,  in  the  case  of  the  Jews,  who 
followed  a different  way  of  accomplishing  the  same  end,  the 
dates  of  these  feasts  refer  to  epochs  or  eras.  The  distinction 
which  has  been  made  between  the  political  and  technical  or  as- 
tronomical epoch  applies  also  here,  and  it  is  the  object  to  dis- 
cover which  of  these  dates  refers  particularly  to  some  technical 
epoch,  or  whether  the  Jewish  political  and  technical  epochs  were 
in  any  case  identical.  If  the  numbers  refer  to  dates  of  the  ver- 
nal equinox  and  autumnal  equinox,  and  places  of  the  moon,  the 
historical  epochs  should  be  such  as  to  allow  the  phenomena  to 
fall  on  the  dates  to  which  they  refer. 

EPOCH  OF  THE  PASSOVER. 

In  the  year  b.c.  1397  the  vernal  equinox  was  on  the  2d  of 
April ; this  was  also  the  2d  of  the  Egyptian  month  Pachons.  If 
Abib,  the  first  month,  in  this  year  is  made  to  begin  at  the  vernal 
equinox,  then  the  Jewish  year  is  placed  in  relation  to  the  Julian, 
which  permits,  on  the  assumption  that  the  year  was  a vague  one, 
the  discovery  of  the  astronomical  character  of  the  great  historical 
dates.  It  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  the  Roman  and  Egyptian 
day  began  at  midnight,  and  the  Jewish  day  at  sunset.  The 
following  will  be  the  condition  of  the  three  years  in  b.c.  1397  : 

b.c.  1397,  Julian  year,  vernal  equinox  April  2,  full  moon  April  21. 

“ Egyptian  “ “ Pachons  2,  “ Pachons  21. 

“ Jewish  “ “ Abib  1,  “ Abib  20. 

At  even  of  tbe  20th  day  the  moon  was  full. 


152 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


EPOCH  OP  THE  TABERNACLE. 

b.c.  1396,  Julian  year,  vernal  equinox  April  2,  full  moon  April  11. 
“ Egyptian  “ “ Pachons  2,  “ Pachons  11. 

“ Jewish  “ “ Abib  1,  “ Abib  10. 

The  tabernacle  was  set  up  on  the  first  day  of  the  first  month 

of  the  second  year,  which  was  the  day  of  the  vernal  equinox, 
and  the  full  moon  was  on  the  10th  of  Abib,  the  date  of  the  day 
of  the  selection  of  the  paschal  lamb. 

Two  schemes  for  the  epochs  of  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan 
and  the  judgeship  of  Othniel: 

Scheme  I.  Scheme  II. 

Crossing  of  Jordan,  b.c.  1357.  Crossing  of  Jordan,  b.c.  1364. 

Epoch  of  Othniel,  “ 1343.  Epoch  of  Othniel,  “ 1350. 

Scheme  I.— Crossing  of  the  Jordan , B.C.  1357. 
b.c.  1357,  Julian  year,  vernal  equinox  April  2,  new  moon  April  14. 
“ Egyptian  “ “ Pachons  12,  “ Pachons  24. 

“ Jewish  “ “ Abib  11,  “ Abib  23. 

EPOCH  OP  OTHNIEL,  B.C.  1343. 

b.c.  1343,  Julian  year,  autumnal  equinox  October  6. 

“ Egyptian  “ “ “ Athyr  17. 

“ Jewish  “ “ “ Ethanim  16. 

Scheme  II. — This  reckons  the  forty  years  from  the  era  of  the 
passover  in  decimestrial  years. 

EPOCH  OF  THE  CROSSING  OP  THE  JORDAN,  B.C.  1364. 
b.c.  1364,  vernal  equinox  April  2,  visible  new  moon  April  3. 

“ “ Pachons  10,  “ “ Pachons  11. 

“ “ Abib  9 “ “ Abib  10. 

The  Jordan  was  crossed  on  the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon, 
Abib  10,  the  day  following  the  vernal  equinox.* 

EPOCH  OP  OTHNIEL,  B.C.  1350. 
b.c.  1350,  autumnal  equinox  October  7,  full  moon  October  7. 

“ “ “ Athyr  16,  “ Athyr  16. 

“ “ “ Ethanim  15,  “ Ethanim  15. 

The  year  of  Othniel  began  with  the  seventh  month  of  the 
forty-eighth  year  of  the  exodus,  which  in  b.c.  1350  had  the  full 
moon  on  the  15th  of  Ethanim,  the  day  of  the  autumnal  equinox. 


* See  Joshua  iv.  19,  for  date  of  the  passage  of  the  Jordan. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  153 


The  following  sets  forth  in  one  view  the  results  so  far  obtained  : 

Epoch  of  Exodus  B.C.  1397,  vernal  equinox  Abib  1,  full  moon  Abib  21. 

“ Tabernacle  “ 1396,  “ “ 1,  “ “ 10. 

Scheme  I. 

Epoch  of  Crossing  of  Jordan  b.c.  1357,  vernal  equinox  Abib  11,  new 

moon  Abib  23. 

“ Othniel  “ 1343,  autumnal  equinox  Ethanim  1G. 

Scheme  II. 

Epoch  of  Crossing  of  Jordan  b.c.  1364,  vernal  equinox  Abib  9,  visible 

new  moon  Abib  10. 

“ Othniel  “ 1350,  autumnal  equinox  Ethanim  15, 

full  moon  Ethanim  15. 

In  all  of  these  cases,  except  those  of  Scheme  I.  for  the  cross- 
ing of  the  Jordan  and  the  epoch  of  Othniel,  dates  connected 
with  the  two  great  historical  festivals  of  the  Jews  are  found  for 
the  epochs  taken  to  have  specific  astronomical  phenomena  of  the 
solar  and  lunar  years.  It  is  probable  that  the  Jews  at  this  time 
had  a lunar  month  with  the  visible  new  moon  on  the  1st  of  the 
month.  It  is  possible  the  vague  and  the  lunar  months  boro  the 
same  names,  the  lunar  Abib  commencing  with  the  visible  new 
moon  of  the  vague  Abib.  This  would  intercalate  the  lunar  year 
with  an  additional  month  of  the  same  name  whenever  there 
were  two  visible  new  moons  in  any  one  vague  month. 

Hebrew  scholars  have  explained  the  names  Abib,  first  month  ; 
Zif,  second  month  ; Ethanim,  seventh  month  ; Bui,  eighth  month, 
as  referring  to  seasons  or  fixed  times  of  the  year.  Contrary  to 
the  received  opinion,  it  has  been  proposed  to  derive  Abib  from 
the  Egyptian  month  Epiplii,  but  there  is  no  ground  for  this  un- 
less the  exodus  is  to  be  put  at  a much  later  period  ; that  is, 
about  b.c.  1157,  or  later,  if  the  vernal  equinox  is  to  fall  in  the 
month  Epiphi.  The  same  objection  does  not  apply  to  a common 
derivation  of  the  corresponding  months  Athyr  and  Ethanim. 
Not  only  do  they  resemble  each  other  in  their  formation,  but, 
independently  of  this,  they  are  connected  with  the  same  things. 
“ The  third  Egyptian  month  was  called  after  Athor,  in  which  the 
death  of  Osiris  was  fabled  to  have  happened  ; and  it  was  at  this 
season  that  the  shrines  of  the  goddess  (Ceres  or  Isis)  were  car- 
ried in  procession,  ‘ the  common  time,’  says  Plutarch,  ‘ for  the 
solemnization  of  the  feasts  in  her  honor  falling  within  the 


154 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


months  in  which  the  Pleiades  appear,  and  the  husbandmen  be- 
gin to  sow  their  corn,  called  by  the  Egyptians  Athyr.’  ” * Eth- 
anim  is  also  the  month  in  which  ploughing  and  sowing  begin. 

The  following  table  will  be  of  use  to  find  corresponding  dates 
of  the  Egyptian  and  Jewish  vague  years.  It  conforms  to  the 
preceding  calculations.  The  Jewish  day  begins  at  sunset,  and 
Jewish  dates  concur  in  part  with  two  dates  of  the  Egyptian 
year.  The  intercalary  days  are  added  to  the  sixth  month  of 
the  Jewish  year,  while  they  follow  the  twelfth  month  of  the 
Egyptian  year.  The  table  gives  the  dates  corresponding  to 
the  1st  of  each  month  of  the  Jewish  year.  In  applying  this 
table  I have  followed  only  the  concurrence  of  the  last  Egyptian 
date, — that  is,  1st  of  Abib  = 2d  Pachons. 


Jewish  Dates. 

Egyptian  Dates. 

1st  of  first 

month 

= 

lst-2d 

Pachons. 

U 

second 

ii 

ll 

Payni. 

it 

third 

a 

== 

ll 

Epiphi. 

ll 

fourth 

ii 

= 

ll 

Mesori. 

u 

fifth 

a 

ll 

Intercalary  days. 

it 

sixth 

ii 

— 

26th-27fh  Thoth. 

ll 

seventh 

ii 

= 

lst-2d 

Athyr. 

ll 

eighth 

ii 

= 

ii 

Khoiakh. 

ll 

ninth 

ii 

= 

ii 

Tybi. 

It 

tenth 

ii 

= 

ii 

Meehir. 

ll 

eleventh 

u 

= 

ii 

Phamenoth. 

ll 

twelfth 

it 

— 

ii 

Pharmuthi. 

It  was  shown  that  by  bringing  the  1st  of  Abib  to  the  vernal 
equinox,  hi  b.c.  1397,  the  fixed  dates  of  the  great  festivals  of  the 
Jewish  religion  found  suitable  astronomical  phenomena  in  the 
several  years  taken  as  Jewish  epochs.  These  epochs  may  be 
used  as  eras  in  the  technical  sense.  By  inspection  of  the  chro- 
nological table,  it  will  be  seen  there  is  not  an  unbroken  series 
of  eponymous  cycles  from  Othniel  to  Solomon.  The  series  is 
scarcely  begun  when  it  ceases  with  the  captivity  of  Moab. 
Ehud  begins  another  series,  and  this  lasts  for  only  two  cycles, 
when  the  captivity  of  Jabin  puts  it  to  an  end.  Deborah  and 
Barak  begin  another,  which  is  also  broken  by  a captivity. 
Gideon  begins  another,  but  it  is  not  continued.  The  system  is 
abandoned,  and  does  not  appear  again  until  perhaps  Samson 


* “ The  Ancient  Egyptians”  (Wilkinson),  vol.  iii.  p.  116. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  155 


became  eponym,  for  he  judged  Israel  twenty  years  in  the  time 
of  the  Philistines.  This  last  captivity  was  for  forty  years. 
But  with  Eli  a series  begins  which  is  continued  unbroken  down 
to  Rehoboam.  Prom  the  character  of  these  cycles,  for  they 
imply  an  autonomy  at  their  institution,  the  result  is  what  must 
have  happened.  They  would  naturally  be  tei’minated  when  the 
nation  was  subjugated  and  deprived  of  its  legitimate  rulers. 
But  this  is  not  the  only  cause  of  their  suppression.  During 
this  portion  of  Jewish  history,  and  Secondary  to  the  cause  just 
mentioned,  the  civil  and  l-eligious  polity  of  the  nation  was  in  a 
disturbed  state.  By  contact  with  other  peoples  they  became 
contaminated  with  religions  other  than  the  pure  worship  of 
Jehovah.  These  affected  their  methods  of  measuring  time. 
The  ritual  of  a religion  conforms  to  tho  time-measurement  in 
use.  This  is  true  of  the  Jews  as  well  as  of  all  other  nations. 
This  may  explain  why  the  judges,  beginning  with  Abimelech 
and  ending  with  Abdon,  had  abandoned  the  former  form  of  the 
year  by  tho  cycle,  and  taken  up  with  one  of  twelve  months. 
Othniel  begins  his  cycle  with  the  seventh  month,  and  the  full 
moon  on  the  fifteenth  day,  which  was  also  the  day  of  the 
autumnal  equinox.  Eli  also  begins  his  cycle  with  the  seventh 
month.  In  b.c.  1021  tho  full  moon  was  on  July  2,  the  day  of 
the  summer  solstice  ; this  date  concurred  with  Athyr  2 and 
Ethanim  1.  The  new  moon  was  on  July  17,  Athyr  17,  and 
Ethanim  16.  July  17  was  tho  date  of  the  heliacal  rising  of 
Sirius  on  the  day  of  the  new  moon  following  the  summer  solstice. 
The  series  of  eponymous  cycles  beginning  with  that  of  Eli  have 
suitable  astronomical  phenomena  at  the  beginning.  It  would 
seem  that  a lunar  vague  year,  rather  than  the  common  year,  was 
used.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  the  practice  was  confined 
to  this  form.  The  cycles  in  this  and  the  subsequent  table  of 
Part  II.  are  all  in  connection  with  the  vague  year,  using  months 
of  thirty  days,  with  five  intercalary  days;  and  as  both  forms  were 
used,  a slight  variation,  not  amounting  to  a year,  may  more 
correctly  show  the  true  state  of  the  case  than  the  one  followed. 

EPOCH  OP  THE  FOUNDATION  OP  SOLOMON’S  TEMPLE. 

The  era  of  the  tabernacle  was  placed  in  b.c.  1396.  The  tab- 
ernacle was  set  up  in  the  first  day  of  the  first  month.  The 


156 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


children  of  Israel  took  their  journey  out  of  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai  in  the  20th  of  the  second  month.  This  date,  the  20th  of 
the  second  month,  was  the  coming  out  of  Egypt  alluded  to  in 
the  statement  of  I.  Kings  vi.  1.  In  the  four  hundred  and 
eightieth  year  after  the  children  of  Israel  were  come  out  of 
Egypt,  in  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign,  in  the  second  month  Zif, 
Solomon  began  to  build  the  house  of  the  Lord.  In  the  table  the 
fourth  year  of  Solomon  and  the  four  hundi’ed  and  eightieth 
year  of  the  tabernacle  began  in  b.c.  918.  If  the  foundation  of 
Solomon’s  temple  was  on  the  20th  of  the  second  month,  the 
date  of  the  departure  from  Sinai,  it  is  brought  exactly  to  the 
beginning  of  the  four  hundred  and  eightieth  year  of  the  coming 
out  of  the  children  of  Israel.  Further,  if  the  foundation  of  the 
temple  was  on  the  day  of  the  new  moon,  the  new  moon  will  be 
on  this  date.  If  the  chronological  arrangement  is  correct,  such 
might  be  expected  to  be  the  case,  because  this  practice  was  cus- 
tomary among  the  ancients,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
the  Jews  exceptional  in  this  instance,  when  they  had  so  many 
customs  of  this  kind  in  common  with  other  nations.  In  b.c. 
918  the  new  moon  was  on  the  22d  of  January,  concurrent  with 
the  21st  of  Payni.  In  this  year  the  20th  of  the  second  month, 
Zif,  concurred  with  the  21st  of  Payni.  This  brings  the  new 
moon  to  that  date.  Following  the  fashion  of  giving  these  dates 
with  the  day  of  the  week,  it  may  be  fairly  concluded  that  Solo- 
mon’s temple  was  founded  on  Saturday,  the  22d  of  January, 
b.c.  918. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OP  THE  JEWS  (CONTINUED). 

PABT  II. 

From  the  First  Years  of  the  Reigns  of  Rehoboam  and  Jeroboam  I. 

The  problem  connected  with  the  synchronous  histories  of 
Judah  and  Israel  may  be  described  as  follows : Let  a list  of  the 
kings  of  Judah  be  arranged  in  a column  parallel  with  another 
of  the  kings  of  Israel,  the  reigns  of  each  being  numbered  year 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  157 

by  year,  and  make  the  first  years  of  the  kings  of  Judah  to  fall 
on  the  same  line  with  the  years  of  the  kings  of  Israel,  in  which 
they  are  said  to  have  begun  to  reign,  and  do  the  same  for  the 
kings  of  Israel  in  the  line  of  Judah.  The  two  lines  run  paral- 
lel from  the  first  of  Jeroboam  I.  to  the  final  year  of  Hoshea, 
the  last  king  of  the  ten  tribes,  which  synchronizes  with  the 
sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  king  of  Judah.  It  will  be  observed, 
the  line  of  Israel  is  shorter  than  the  line  of  Judah  for  the  same 
period ; in  each  line  there  are  many  cases  of  overlappings  of 
one  or  more  years  of  the  last  part  of  a king’s  reign  with  the 
first  of  his  successor,  this  being  true  of  Israel,  although  its  lino 
is  apparently  too  short.  In  Judah  between  Amaziah  and  Aza- 
riah  there  is  an  interval  of  eleven  years,  which  is  not  occupied 
by  the  reign  of  any  king,  and  in  Israel  there  arc  three  such 
gaps,  one  of  twenty-two  years  between  Jeroboam  II.  and  Zaeh- 
ariab,  one  of  ono  year  between  Menahcm  and  Pekahiah,  and 
one  of  seven  years  between  Pekah  and  Hoshea.  The  overlaps 
are  explained  by  commentators  in  two  ways.  First,  in  the  old 
chronological  lists,  the  custom  was  to  count  the  years  of  a 
king’s  reign  by  the  number  of  years  in  which  he  held  authority. 
This  practice  is  admissible  when  the  exact  date  of  the  begin- 
ning and  end  of  a reign  bas  not  been  retained.  This  will  ac- 
count for  the  overlapping  in  many  instances  of  the  first  year  of 
a reign  with  the  last  year  of  its  predecessor,  such  years  being 
common  to  both,  and  are  only  counted  once  in  the  chronological 
tables.  Second,  in  the  case  where  the  overlaps  are  for  several 
years,  these  are  explained  to  be  joint  reigns;  the  son  or  succes- 
sor of  a king  being  joined  in  authority  with  his  predecessor  for 
that  much  time. 

Unless  there  is  something  in  the  historical  account  to  clearly 
countenance  the  hypothesis  of  a double  reign,  such  an  explanation 
has  no  other  merit  than  that  it  may  serve  for  want  of  a better. 
The  gaps  in  the  line  of  Judah  and  Israel  are  explained  to  be  in- 
terregna. This  is  done,  although  the  histoi-ical  account  makes 
no  mention  of  them,  and  the  impression  left  after  its  perusal  is, 
these  kings  succeeded  each  other  without  any  separation  at  all. 
The  existence  of  these  is  only  discovered  when  a chronological 
table  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  is  at- 
tempted. 

14 


158 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Data  of  the  Reigns  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel. 


Rehoboam  reigned  seventeen  years 

Jeroboam  I.  reigned  twenty-two  years 

Abijam,  king  of  Judah,  began  in  the  eighteenth 
year  of  Jeroboam  I.,  and  reigned  three  years  . . 
Asa,  king  of  Judah,  began  in  the  twentieth  year  of 
Jeroboam  I.,  and  reigned  forty-one  years  . . . 
Nadab,  king  of  Israel,  began  in  the  second  year  of 

Asa,  and  reigned  two  years 

Baasha,  king  of  Israel,  began  in  the  third  year  of 

Asa.  He  reigned  twenty-four  years 

Elah  began  in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of  Asa.  He 

reigned  over  Israel  two  years 

Zimri  began  in  the  twenth-seventh  year  of  Asa. 

He  reigned  over  Israel  seven  days 

Omri  began  in  the  thirty-first  year  of  Asa  to  reign 
over  Israel.  He  reigned  in  Tirzah  six  years. 

He  reigned  twelve  years 

Ahab  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  thirty- 
eighth  year  of  Asa.  He  reigned  twenty-two 

years 

Jehoshapliat  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Ahab.  Ho  reigned  twenty-five 

years 

Ahaziah  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  seven- 
teenth year  of  Jehosliaphat.  He  reigned  two 

years 

Jehoram  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  eigh- 
teenth year  of  Jehoshapbat.  He  reigned  twelve 

years 

Jehoram,  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  his  father  being 
then  king,  began  to  reign  over  Judah.  He 

reigned  eight  years 

Ahaziah  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  twelfth 
year  of  Joram  of  Israel.  He  reigned  one  year  . 
Ahaziah  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  eleventh 

year  of  Joram 

Jehu  reigned  twenty-eight  years 

Athaliah  reigned  over  Judah  six  years 

Jehoash  began  in  the  seventh  year  of  Jehu.  He 

reigned  forty  years  over  Judah 

Jehoahaz  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  twenty- 
third  year  of  Jehoash.  He  reigned  seventeen 
years 


I.  Kings  xiv.  21. 

“ xiv.  20. 

“ xv.  1,  2. 

“ xv.  9,  10. 

“ xv.  25. 

“ xv.  33. 

“ xvi.  8. 

“ xvi.  15. 

“ xvi.  23. 

“ xvi.  29. 

“ xxii.  41,  42. 

“ xxii.  51. 

II.  Kings  iii.  1. 

“ viii.  16,  17. 

“ viii.  25,  26. 

“ ix.  29. 

“ x.  36. 

“ xi.  3. 

“ xii.  1. 

“ xiii.  1. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  159 


Jehoash  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  thirty- 
seventh  year  of  Jehoash  of  Judah.  He  reigned 

sixteen  years 

Amaziah  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  second 
year  of  Jehoash  of  Israel.  He  reigned  twenty- 

nine  years 

Jeroboam  II.  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  fif- 
teenth year  of  Amaziah.  He  reigned  forty-one 

years 

Azariah  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  year  of  Jeroboam  II.  Ho  reigned  fifty- 

two  years 

Zachariah  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  thirty- 
eighth  year  of  Azariah.  Ho  reigned  six  months  . 
Shallum  began  in  the  thirty-ninth  year  of  Azariah. 

He  reigned  over  Israel  one  month 

Menahem  began  in  the  thirty-ninth  year  of  Aza- 
riah. Ho  reigned  over  Israel  ten  years  .... 
Pekahiah  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  fiftieth 
year  of  Azariah.  He  reigned  two  years  . . . . 
Pekah  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  fifty -second 
year  of  Azariah.  He  reigned  twenty  years  . . 
Jotham  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  second 
year  of  Pekah.  He  reigned  sixteen  years  . . . 
Ahaz  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  seventeenth 
year  of  Pekah.  He  reigned  sixteen  years  . . . 
Hoshea  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in  the  twelfth 

year  of  Ahaz.  He  reigned  nine  years 

Hezekiah  began  to  reign  over  Judah  in  the  third 
year  of  Hoshea.  He  reigned  twenty-nine  years 
The  fourth  of  Hezekiah  is  the  seventh  of  Hoshea  . 
At  the  end  of  three  years,  in  the  sixth  of  Hezekiah 
and  the  ninth  of  Hoshea,  Samaria  was  taken  . 
Manasseh  reigned  over  Judah  fifty-five  years  . 


Amon 

J osiah 

Jehoahaz 

Jehoiakim 

Jehoiachin 

Zedekiah 


two  years  . . . 
thirty-one  years 
three  months  . 
eleven  years  . . 
three  months  . . 
eleven  years  . . 


II.  Kings  xiii.  10. 


xiv.  1,  2. 


xiv.  23. 


xv.  1,  2. 
xv.  8. 
xv.  13. 
xv.  17. 
xv.  23. 
xv.  27. 

xv.  32,  33. 

xvi.  1,  2. 

xvii.  1. 

xviii.  1,  2. 
xviii.  9. 

xviii.  10. 
xxi.  1. 

xxi.  19. 

xxii.  1. 
xxiii.  31. 
xxiii.  36. 
xxiv.  8. 
xxiv.  18. 


The  remaining  data  upon  which  the  chronology  is  founded 
are  considered  in  the  synchronous  histories  of  Babylon  and 
Persia,  and  matters  connected  therewith. 


1G0 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Chronological  Table 

FROM  THE  FIRST  YEARS  OF  REHOBOAM  AND  JEROBOAM  DOWN  TO  THE  COM- 
PLETION OF  THE  SECOND  TEMPLE  IN  THE  SIXTH  YEAR  OF  DARIUS  NOTHUS, 

B.C.  419. 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Tabernacle. 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

Cycles  of  Decimes- 
trial  Years. 

Kings  of  Judah,  j 

Kings  of  Iseael. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

888 

510 

0 

13 

W 1 

'■— < 1 

887 

511 

1 

14 

g-  1 

g 1 

886 

512 

2 

15 

o 2 

o'  2 

885 

513 

3 

16 

Z 3 

g 3 

«H  I 

Institution  of  the  Apis-ivorsliip 

884 

514 

4 

17-18 

g 4-5 

B 4-5-6 

►-i 2 

by  Jeroboam. 

883 

515 

5 

19 

P 6 

_ 6 

§-  3 

882 

516 

6 

20 

7 

‘ 7 

g 4 

881 

517 

7 

21 

8 

8 

B 5 

880 

518 

8 

22 

9 

9 

c 

879 

519 

9 

23-24 

10-11 

10-11-12 

• 7 

878 

520 

10 

25 

12 

12 

8 

877 

521 

11 

26 

13 

13 

9 

876 

522 

12 

27 

14 

14 

10 

875 

523 

13 

28 

15 

15 

11 

874 

524 

14 

29-30 

16-17 

16-17-18 

12 

Abijam. 

873 

525 

15 

31 

1 

18 

13 

872 

526 

16 

32 

2-3 

19 

14 

Asa. 

871 

527 

17 

33 

1 

20 

15 

Nadab. 

870 

528 

18 

34 

2 

21-1-2 

16 

Baasha. 

869 

529 

19 

35-36 

3-4 

2-1-2-3 

17 

868 

530 

20 

37 

5 

3 

18 

867 

531 

21 

38 

6 

4 

19 

866 

532 

22 

39 

7 

5 

20 

865 

533 

23 

40 

8 

6 

21 

864 

534 

24 

1-2 

9-10 

7-8-9 

22 

863 

535 

25 

3 

11 

9 

23 

862 

536 

26 

4 

12 

10 

24 

861 

537 

27 

5 

13 

11 

25 

860 

538 

28 

6 

14 

12 

26 

859 

539 

29 

7-8 

15-16 

13-14-15 

27 

858 

540 

30 

9 

17 

15 

28 

857 

541 

31 

10 

18 

16 

29 

856 

542 

32 

11 

19 

17 

30 

855 

543 

33 

12 

20 

18 

31 

854 

544 

34 

13-14 

21-22 

19-20-21 

32 

853 

545 

35 

15 

23 

21 

33 

852 

546 

36 

16 

24 

22 

34 

851 

547 

37 

17 

25 

23 

35 

Elah. 

850 

548 

38 

18 

26 

24-1-2 

36 

Zimri  1. 

Omri. 

'849 

549 

39 

19-20 

27-28 

2-1-2-3 

1 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OP  THE  JEWS.  161 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

w 

In  U 

w « 

H 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

w 

2 CO 

o,h 

pH 

p ^ 

O (-1 
co  < 

3 2 

C- 

O 

Kings  of  Judah. 

Kings  of  Israel. 

Ctcles  of  Eclipses. 

Kings  of  Assyria,  j 

848 

550 

40 

21 

29 

O 3 

2 

847 

551 

41 

22 

30 

B 4 

3 

840 

552 

42 

23 

31 

a 5 

4 

845 

553 

43 

24 

32 

6 

5 

844 

554 

44 

25-20 

33-34 

7-8-9 

6 

843 

555 

45 

27 

35 

9 

7 

842 

550 

40 

28 

36 

10 

8 

841 

557 

47 

29 

37 

11 

9 

840 

558 

48 

30 

38 

12-1 

10 

<2  1 

830 

559 

49 

31-32 

30-40 

1-2-3 

11 

p 2 

838 

500 

50 

33 

41-1 

t>  3-4 

12 

g 3 

837 

501 

51 

34 

1 

tJ*  4 

13 

1 4 

830 

562 

52 

35 

V 2 

§ 5 

14 

g 5 

835 

563 

53 

36 

S 3 

' 6 

15 

1 o 

834 

564 

54 

37-38 

g 4-5 

7-8-9 

10 

M 7 

833 

565 

55 

39 

•d  6 

9 

17 

M 3 

832 

566 

56 

40 

V 7 

10 

18 

• 9 

831 

567 

57 

1 

8 

11 

19 

10 

830 

568 

58 

2 

9 

12 

20 

11 

820 

560 

59 

3-4 

10-11 

13-14-15 

21 

12 

828 

570 

00 

5 

12 

15 

22 

13 

827 

571 

61 

0 

13 

10 

23 

14 

820 

572 

02 

7 

14 

17 

24 

15 

825 

573 

03 

8 

15 

18 

25 

16 

Ahaziah  1. 

824 

574 

64 

9-10 

16-17 

19-20-21 

20 

17 

823 

575 

65 

11 

18 

% 2-1 

27 

18 

822 

576 

06 

12 

19 

cr  1 

28 

19 

821 

577 

07 

13 

20 

8 2 

29 

20 

820 

578 

68 

14 

21 

g 3 

30 

21 

819 

570 

69 

15-10 

1-22-23 

P 4-5-0 

31 

22 

818 

580 

70 

17 

£ 2-24 

6 

32 

23 

817 

581 

71 

18 

e 3-25 

7 

33 

24 

816 

582 

72 

19 

8 4 

8 

34 

25 

815 

583 

73 

20 

g 5 

9 

35 

20 

814 

584 

74 

21-22 

P 6-7 

10-11-12 

36 

27 

Kings  of  Israel. 

N 

0* 

3 

◄ 

3 

OT 

w 

Old  Series. 

Now  Series. 

o 

Cm 

O 

O 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

10  mos. 

o 

B 

M 

813 

585 

75 

23 

> 8-1 

£ 1-12 

=-(  1 

«H  1 

£ i 

“28 

812 

580 

76 

24 

£ > 2 

& 1 

& 2 

er  1 

cr  2 

£29 

811 

587 

77 

25 

g-S  3 

F 2 

F 3 

F 2 

F 3 

B30 

810 

588 

78 

26 

as,  4 

3 

4 

3 

4 

g 31 

809 

589 

79 

27-28 

• £'  5 

4-5-6 

5 

4-5-6 

5 

§32 

808 

590 

80 

29 

P 1-6 

6-7 

6 

6 

6 

SS33 

807 

591 

81 

30 

9 

7 

7 

7 

7 

134 

806 

592 

82 

31 

ti"  3 

8 

8 

8 

8 

i— '35 

805 

593 

83 

32 

g 4 

9 

9 

9 

9 

1 

804 

594 

84 

33-34 

g,  5-6 

10-11-12 

10 

10-11-12 

10 

d B 2 

803 

595 

85 

35 

• 7 

12 

11 

12 

11 

r-S  3 

i 

14* 


162 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

w 

r p 

fc  o 
O <J 

t\ 

W 5 
< 

H 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

Cycles  of  Decimes- 
trial  Years. 

i 

X 

< 

Q 

O 

u* 

© 

CO 

o 

S5 

« 

Kings  of  Israel. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

Kings  of  Assyria. 

Old  Series. 

New  Series. 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

10  mos. 

802 

596 

86 

36 

8 

13 

12 

13 

12 

go  4 

801 

597 

87 

37 

9 

14 

13 

14 

13 

3 5 

800 

598 

88 

38 

10 

15 

14 

15 

14 

S 6 

790 

599 

89 

39-40 

11-12 

16-17-18 

15 

10-17-18 

15 

J.  7 

798 

600 

90 

13 

18 

16 

18 

16 

e 8 

797 

601 

91 

o fD 

14 

19 

17 

19 

17 

• 9 

796 

602 

92 

3 o 

15 

20 

18 

20 

18 

10 

795 

603 

93 

4 £ 

16 

21 

19 

21 

19 

11 

794 

604 

94 

5-  6“ 

17-18 

22-23-24 

20 

22-23-24 

20 

12 

793 

605 

95 

7 

19 

24 

21 

24 

21 

13 

792 

606 

96 

8 

20 

25 

22 

25 

22 

<1  1 

791 

607 

97 

9 

21 

26 

23 

26 

23 

£ > 

790 

608 

98 

10 

22 

27-28 

24 

27 

24 

3 3 

789 

609 

99 

11-12 

23-24 

1-2-3 

25 

28-29-30 

25 

S3'  4 

788 

610 

100 

13 

25 

C-4  9 

26 

30 

26 

£ 5 

787 

611 

101 

14 

26 

V 4 

27 

31 

27 

6 

786 

612 

102 

15 

27 

g 5 

28 

32 

28 

7 

785 

613 

103 

16 

28 

g"  6 

«-<  1 

33-  1 

29 

8 

784 

614 

104 

17-18 

29-30 

£ 7-8-9 

V 2 

f?  1-2-3 

30 

9 

783 

615 

105 

19 

31 

9 

g 3 

c-  3 

31 

10 

782 

616 

106 

20 

32 

10 

g"  4 

g 4 

32 

11 

781 

617 

107 

21 

33 

11 

N 5 

S 5 

33 

12 

780 

618 

108 

22 

34 

12 

6 

N 6 

34 

13 

779 

619 

109 

23-24 

35-36 

13-14-15 

7 

7-8-9 

35 

14 

778 

620 

110 

25 

37 

15 

8 

9 

36 

15 

777 

621 

111 

26 

38 

=-16-17-1 

9 

10 

1 

16 

776 

622 

112 

27 

39-40 

3-  i 

10 

11 

2 

17 

775 

623 

113 

28 

> 1 

g 2 

11 

12 

g-  3 

18 

774 

624 

114 

29-30 

B 2 

| 3-4-5 

12 

13-14-15 

° 4 

19 

773 

625 

115 

31 

g 3 

F 5 

13 

15 

® 5 

20 

772 

626 

116 

32 

p *4 

6 

14 

16 

3 6 

21 

771 

627 

117 

33 

F 5 

7 

15 

17 

7 

22 

770 

628 

118 

34 

6 

8 

16 

18 

8 

23 

769 

629 

119 

35-36 

7-  8 

9-10-11 

17 

19-20 

9 

24 

768 

630 

120 

37 

9 

11 

=-«  1 

1 

10 

25 

767 

631 

121 

38 

10 

12 

S'  2 

2 

11 

26 

766 

632 

122 

39 

11 

13 

g 3 

S'  3 

12 

27 

765 

633 

123 

40 

12 

14 

r{L  4 

g 4 

13 

28 

764 

634 

124 

1-  2 

13-14 

15-16 

• 5 

a 5-6-7 

14 

29 

763 

635 

125 

3 

15 

£ 1 

6 

- 7 

15 

1 

762 

636 

126 

4 

16 

n 2 

7 

8 

16 

2 

761 

637 

127 

5 

17 

g-  3 

8 

9 

17 

2 3 

760 

638 

128 

6 

18 

o 4 

9 

10 

18 

p 4 

759 

639 

129 

7-  8 

19-20 

§ 5-6-7 

10 

11-12-13 

19 

3 5 

758 

640 

130 

9 

21 

^ 7 

11 

13 

20 

p 6 

757 

641 

131 

10 

22 

.-1  8 

12 

14 

21 

3 7 

756 

642 

132 

11 

23 

9 

13 

15 

22 

1 8 

755 

643 

133 

12 

24 

10 

14 

16 

23 

754 

644 

134 

13-14 

25-26 

11-1 2-13 

15 

17-18-19 

24 

« 10 

753 

645 

135 

15 

27 

13 

16 

19 

25 

!-  1 

752 

646 

136 

16 

28 

14 

1 

C_,  20-  1 

26 

2 

751 

647 

137 

17 

29-  1 

15 

C-H  O 

£5  l 

27 

> 3 

750 

648 

138 

18 

> 1 

16 

5 3 

g.  2 

28 

£ 4 

749 

649 

139 

19-20 

g 2-  3 

17-18-19 

cr  4 

o 3-4-5 

29 

® 5 

748 

650 

140 

21 

2.  4 

19 

g 5 

S 5 

30 

Qi  6 

747 

651 

141 

22 

g-  5 

20 

3 6 

3 6 

31 

p 7 

746 

652 

142 

23 

6 

21 

7 

H 7 

32 

3 8 

745 

653 

143 

24 

7 

22 

8 

' 8 

33 

9 

744 

654 

144 

2.5-26 

8-  9 

23-24-25 

9 

9-10-11 

34 

10 

743 

655 

145 

27 

10 

25 

10 

11 

35 

11 

the  historical  chronology  of  the  jews.  163 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


15.  C. 

Era  of 
Tabernacle. 

•J 

w 

< 

C3 

a ° 

3 £ 

l—i 

w 

Ih 

Ek 

O J 
w < 

w £ 

5 H 

6 

Kings  of  Judah. 

Kinqs  of  Isuael. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

Kings  of  Assyria. 

Kings  of  Babylon.  I 

Old  Series. 

New  Series. 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

10  mos. 

742 

656 

140 

28 

11 

26 

11 

12 

36 

12 

741 

657 

147 

29 

12 

27 

12 

13 

> 1 

13 

740 

058 

148 

30 

13 

28 

13 

14 

p 2 

14 

739 

659 

149 

31-32 

14-15 

29-30-31 

14 

15-10-17 

2.  3 

15 

738 

060 

150 

33 

10 

32 

15 

17 

e.  4 

16 

737 

601 

151 

34 

17 

33 

16 

18 

• 5 

17 

730 

062 

152 

35 

18 

34 

17 

19 

6 

18 

735 

663 

153 

36 

19 

35 

18 

20 

7 

> 1 

734 

664 

154 

37-38 

20-21 

30-37-38 

19 

21-22-23 

8 

m 2 

733 

665 

155 

39 

22 

38 

20 

23 

9 

5 3 

732 

060 

156 

40 

23 

39 

21 

24 

10 

a 4 

731 

067 

157 

1 

24 

40 

22 

25 

11 

3*  5 

730 

608 

158 

2 

25 

41 

23 

26 

12 

-1  u 

729 

609 

159 

3-  4 

26-27 

24 

27-28-29 

13 

a-  7 

728 

670 

100 

5 

28 

25 

29 

14 

8 

1 

727 

671 

101 

6 

29 

26 

30 

15 

9 

ftj  2 

720 

072 

102 

7 

30 

27 

31 

16 

!-?  1 

& 3 

725 

673 

163 

8 

31 

28 

32 

17 

qo^  2 

a t 

724 

074 

104 

9-10 

32-33 

29 

33-34-35 

18 

p 3 

p 5 

723 

675 

165 

11 

34 

30 

35 

19 

4 

$ 6 

722 

676 

160 

12 

35 

31 

36 

20 

►a  5 

g 7 

721 

077 

107 

13 

36 

32 

37 

21 

r 6 

8 

720 

678 

168 

14 

37 

33 

38 

22 

7 

9 

719 

679 

109 

15-16 

38-39 

SI 

39-40 

23 

8 

10 

718 

680 

170 

17 

40 

Zacha- 

24 

9 

11 

717 

081 

171 

18 

41 

S »3 

riali  1. 

25 

10 

12 

710 

682 

172 

19 

42 

P 4 

Shal- 

26 

11 

13 

715 

683 

173 

20 

43 

5 

lum  1. 

27 

12 

14 

Kings  of 

J UDA1I. 

Kings  of 

Israel. 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

714 

684 

174 

21-22 

44-45 

sag  f 

co  a>  o 

28 

13 

4 

713 

685 

175 

23 

46 

3 5 7 

29 

14 

8 • 2 

712 

686 

176 

24 

47 

? 8 

30 

15 

711 

687 

177 

25 

48 

"0  9 

31 

16 

5'tr  2 

710 

688 

178 

26 

49-50 

=■&  1-10 

32 

17 

8 S'  3 

709 

689 

179 

27-28 

50-51 

p.P  2 

33 

18 

708 

690 

180 

29 

52-  1 

1 

1-2 

M 1 

34 

19 

go  2 

707 

691 

181 

30 

o 1 

o 2 

hj  2 

T!  2 

35 

m i 

• ' 1 

700 

692 

182 

31 

1 3 

3 

36 

« p - 

b-i  2 

705 

693 

183 

32 

p 3 

p 4 

& 4 

p 4 

1 

rig"  3 

704 

694 

184 

33-34 

3 4-5 

B 5 

^ 5-6-7 

5 

2 

4 

S'?  4 

703 

695 

185 

35 

' 0 

6 

7 

6 

3 

•3  5 

5°  5 

702 

096 

186 

36 

7 

7 

8 

7 

4 

? i 

g i 

701 

097 

187 

37 

8 

8 

9 

8 

5 

g>  2 

p 2 

700 

098 

188 

38 

9 

9 

10 

9 

6 

S 3 

a 3 

099 

099 

189 

39-40 

10-11 

10 

11-12-13 

10 

7 

•S  4 

g.  4 

098 

700 

190 

1 

12 

11 

13 

11 

8 

? 5 

2 5 

697 

701 

191 

2 

13 

12 

14 

12 

9 

0 

3 6 

696 

702 

192 

3 

14 

13 

15 

13 

10 

7 

1 7 

095 

703 

193 

4 

15 

14 

16 

14 

11 

8 

g*  8 

694 

704 

194 

5-  G 

16-17 

15 

17-18-19 

15 

12 

9 

OT  9 

693 

705 

195 

7 

18 

16 

19 

16 

13 

10 

10 

164 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY, 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


W 

W 

fa 

< 

X 

w 

at 

O g 

Kings  oi 

Judah. 

Kings  or  Israel. 

fa 

s 

fa 

fa 

fa  9 

O hi 

« 5 

B.C. 

O < 

< g 

CO  fa 

P fa 

fa  5fa 

w 

< 

W 

w 

fa 

-< 

fa  E- 

3 

o 

CO 

W 

o 

CO 

o 

o 

o 

c 

o 

of 

g 5 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

10  mos. 

12  mos. 

o 

Sir, 

X 

►fa 

o 

fa 

O 

a 

w 

a 

092 

706 

196 

8 

19-20-1 

(16) 

20 

17 

14 

ii 

11 

691 

707 

197 

9 

2 

(18) 

15 

12 

12 

690 

708 

198 

10 

^ 3 

(19) 

16 

13 

1 

689 

709 

199 

11-12 

sf  4-5 

5*  (20) 

17 

14 

P >•  2 

68S 

710 

200 

13 

n 6 

CD 

fa 

18 

15 

S & 3 

087 

711 

201 

14 

7 

19 

16 

CD  4 

680 

712 

202 

15 

8 

CD 

20 

17 

^ 5 

P 

Senna- 

p 

clierib. 

685 

713 

203 

16 

9 

s 

21 

GO  1 

1 

684 

714 

204 

17-18 

10-11 

22 

3 2 

2 

683 

715 

205 

19 

12 

a i 

23 

3 3 

g W 1 

682 

716 

206 

20 

13 

° 2 

24 

o 4 

H 1 

681 

717 

207 

21 

14 

S'  3 

25 

13*  r. 

* 3 

a 2 

p 

fa 

Apara- 

P 

O' 

nailius. 

5*7* 

S'  3 

680 

718 

20S 

22 

1-15-10 

a i 

(3)— 4 

26 

6 

1 

079 

719 

209 

23-24 

W 2 

CD  2 

5 

27 

7 

2 

• 4 

678 

720 

210 

25 

K a 

CD  3 

6 

28 

8 

3 

5 

677 

721 

211 

26 

CD  4 

g 4 

7 

29 

9 

4 

6 

676 

722 

212 

27 

£•5-6-7 

8 

30 

10 

5 

7 

075 

723 

213 

28 

& 7 

• 6 

9 

31 

11 

6 

8 

Rege- 

belos. 

G74 

724 

214 

29-30 

8 

7 

32 

12 

1 

9 

| 

< 

x 

o 

< 

a 

at 

e 

fa 

fa 

P 

O 

•S 

W 

< 

« 

fa 

fa 

fa 

o 

o 

o 

o 

° 

o 

fa 

o 

o 

5« 

se 

y, 

s? 

W 

fa 

o 

►fa 

M 

►> 

673 

725 

215 

31 

a 9 

33 

a?}? 

314 

g l 

►310 

072 

720 

216 

32 

g 10 

34 

w 2 

an 

671 

727 

217 

33 

% 11 
£12-13-11 

35 

H15 

S 3 

p 12 

670 

728 

218 

34 

36 

§16 

B 1 

£18 

669 

729 

219 

35-36 

g-  14 

1 

ffl7 

§•14 

668 

730 

220 

37 

15 

a 2 

ais 

*1  C/3  9 

• 15 

667 

731 

9*21 

38 

16 

g 3 

F19 

3 3 

16 

666 

732 

222 

39 

17 

CD  4 

E 5 

20 

P P t 

W o 5 

17 

665 

733 

223 

40-1 

18 

21 

18 

604 

734 

224 

1-2 

19-20-21 

& 6 

22 

^ 6 

19 

663 

735 

225 

3 

21 

• 7 

23 

2.  7 

20 

662 

736 

226 

4 

22 

8 

24 

F 8 

21 

601 

737 

227 

5 

23 

9 

M 1 

1 

22 

660 

738 

228 

6 

24 

10 

a 2 

> 2 

23 

659 

739 

229 

7-8 

25 

11 

& 3 

p 3 

24 

658 

740 

230 

9 

26-27-28 

12 

§,  i 

3.  4 

25 

657 

741 

231 

10 

^ 28 

13 

a 5 

a 5 

26 

650 

742 

232 

11 

? 29-1 

14 

3 6 

o 6 

27 

055 

743 

233 

12 

3 2 

15 

•p  7 

P 7 

28 

654 

744 

234 

13-14 

g 3-4 

16 

8 

8 

29 

653 

745 

235 

15 

17 

9 

9 

30 

652 

746 

236 

16 

F 6 

18 

10 

10 

1 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OE  THE  JEWS.  1G5 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


D.C. 

Era.  of 
Tabernacle. 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

Cycles  of  Decimes* 
trial  Years. 

i 

H 

< 

ft 

P 

Pm 

O 

p 

M 

Kings  of  Assyeia. 

Kings  of  Babylon. 

Kings  of  Egypt. 

G51 

747 

237 

17 

7 

11 

11 

►U  2 

650 

748 

238 

18 

8 

12 

12 

P 3 

619 

749 

239 

19-20 

9-10 

t>  1 

GO  1 

B 4 

648 

750 

240 

21 

11 

CO  2 

o 2 

B 5 

647 

751 

241 

22 

12 

S 3 

a 3 

5-  6 

646 

752 

242 

23 

13 

g 4 

£ 4 

o'  7 

645 

753 

243 

24 

14 

O 5 

S’  ,r) 

5"  8 

644 

754 

244 

25-26 

15-16 

►S’  ^ 

o 6 

w 9 

643 

755 

245 

27 

17 

a 7 

co  7 

f 10 

64'2 

756 

246 

28 

18 

' 8 

8 

11 

641 

757 

247 

29 

19 

9 

9 

12 

640 

758 

248 

30 

20 

10 

10 

13 

639 

759 

249 

31-32 

21-22 

11 

11 

14 

638 

760 

250 

33 

23 

12 

12 

15 

637 

761 

251 

34 

24 

13 

13 

16 

636 

762 

252 

35 

25 

14 

14 

17 

635 

763 

253 

36 

26 

15 

15 

18 

634 

764 

254 

37-38 

27-28 

16 

16 

19 

633 

765 

255 

39 

29 

17 

17 

20 

632 

766 

256 

40-  1 

30 

18 

18 

21 

631 

767 

257 

1 

31 

19 

19 

22 

630 

768 

258 

2 

32 

20 

20 

23 

629 

769 

259 

3-  4 

33-34 

* 1 

24 

628 

770 

260 

5 

35 

B 2 

25 

627 

771 

261 

6 

36 

& 3 

26 

626 

772 

262 

7 

37 

g 4 

27 

625 

773 

263 

8 

38 

& 5 

28 

624 

774 

264 

9-10 

39-40 

o 6 

29 

623 

775 

265 

11 

41 

CO  7 

30 

622 

776 

266 

12 

42 

8 

31 

621 

777 

267 

13 

43 

9 

32 

620 

778 

268 

14 

44 

10 

33 

619 

779 

269 

15-16 

45-46 

11 

34 

618 

780 

270 

17 

47 

12 

35 

617 

781 

271 

18 

48 

13 

36 

616 

782 

272 

19 

49 

14 

37 

615 

783 

273 

20 

50 

15 

38 

614 

784 

274 

21-22 

51-52 

16 

39 

613 

785 

275 

23 

53 

17 

40 

G12 

786 

276 

24 

t 54-55 

18 

41 

611 

787 

277 

25 

B 1-2 

19 

42 

610 

788 

278 

26 

Do  1 

20 

43 

609 

789 

279 

27-28 

• §.  2-  3 

21 

44 

608 

790 

280 

29 

P 4 
p 

22 

45 

Kings  of  Babylon. 

607 

791 

281 

30 

5 

tz!  1 

46 

606 

792 

282 

31 

6 

g.  2 

47 

605 

793 

283 

32 

7 

j>  3 

48 

604 

794 

284 

33-34 

8-  9 

1 4 

49 

603 

795 

285 

35 

10 

p'  5 

50 

602 

796 

286 

36 

11 

g 6 

51 

601 

797 

287 

37 

12 

S 7 

52 

GOO 

798 

288 

38 

13 

' 8 

53 

599 

799 

289 

39-40 

14-15 

9 

54 

598 

800 

290 

1 

16 

10 

1 

166 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY, 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


li.C. 

Era  of 
Tabernacle. 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

Cycles  of  Decimes- 
TRIAL  YEAr.S. 

Kings  of  Jodah. 

Kings  of  Babylon. 

Kings  of  Egypt. 

Kings  of  Tyre. 

597 

801 

291 

2 

17 

ii 

2 

596 

802 

292 

3 

18 

12 

8 3 

595 

803 

293 

4 

19 

13 

5t  1 

g-  4 

594 

804 

294 

5-6 

20-21 

14 

g-  2 

593 

805 

295 

7 

22 

15 

e 3 

6 

592 

806 

296 

8 

23 

16 

& l 

7 

591 

807 

297 

9 

24 

17 

g,  5 

8 

590 

808 

298 

10 

25 

18 

B 6 

9 

589 

809 

299 

11-12 

26-27 

19 

<x>  7 

10 

& 1 

588 

810 

300 

13 

28 

20 

1 8 

11 

o 2 

587 

811 

301 

14 

29 

21 

8 y 

12 

g-  3 

5SG 

812 

302 

15 

30 

(22) 

10 

13 

£ 4 

Captivities. 

P 

W 

« 

s 

EH 

P 

O 

P 

o 

3d  of 

18  th 

o 

o 

55 

J’kirn. 

Nob. 

W 

M 

585 

813 

303 

16 

£ 31-1 

(23) 

11 

Z 14 

5 

584 

814 

304 

17-18 

& 1-2 

(24) 

12 

o 

g 15 

6 

583 

815 

305 

19 

o c_|  o 

(25)  1 

13 

8 0 

►d 

P 16 

7 

582 

816 

306 

20 

o'er  4 

1 

14 

►§  1 

hJ?  1 

8 

581 

817 

307 

21 

P O c 

3 2 

15 

a 2 

-d 

1 2 

9 

580 

818 

308 

22 

g.  3 

16 

3.  3 

% 

B 3 

10 

579 

819 

309 

23-24 

S’  7-8 

£ 4-5 

17 

^ 4 

O 

B 4 

11 

578 

820 

310 

25 

B 9 

& 6 

18 

o 5 

g.  5 

12 

577 

821 

311 

26 

10 

p 7 

19 

2 6 

CO 

EW  1 

13 

576 

822 

312 

27 

5?  li-i 

& 8 

20 

CL  7 

S 

2 

W 1 

575 

823 

313 

28 

b-n  1 

S 9 

21 

V!  8 

VI 

B*  3 

P 2 

574 

824 

314 

29-30 

S.g,  2-3 

1 10-11 

22 

g 9 

p 

3 4 

£ 3 

573 

825 

315 

31 

gg.  4 

n 12 

23 

4 10 

•-J 

• 5 

M 4 

572 

826 

316 

32 

1 13 

24 

2,  ii 

6 

• 5 

571 

827 

317 

33 

3 S-  6 

m 14 

25 

e-<  12 

7 

6 

570 

828 

318 

34 

' ’ 7 

ST  15 

26 

g-  13 

o 

8 

7 

569 

829 

319 

35-36 

8-9 

Z 16-17 

27 

o 14 

9 

8 

568 

830 

320 

37 

10 

(2.  18 

28 

£ 15 

& 0 

10 

9 

567 

831 

321 

38 

11 

<g  19 

29 

E 16 

£ 1 

11 

10 

B 

Q* 

*A 

566 

832 

322 

39 

20 

30 

' 17 

5 2 

12 

US 

N 

Jl32 

565 

833 

323 

40 

21 

31 

18 

S?  3 

13 

i 

564 

834 

324 

22-23 

32 

19 

' 4 

14 

2 

* Ecnibalus  two  mouths, 
t Clielbes  ten  months. 

X Abhar  three  months. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OR  THE  JEWS.  167 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


P 

w 

◄ 

H 

w 

03 

w 

P3 

Captivities. 

P-i 

B.C. 

Cm  » 
o "1 

U.  hH 

° Pm 

Kings  of 

CJ 

W 

Pi 

EH 

< oz 

Babylon. 

Cm 

Cm 

(H  P 

3d  of 

18th  of 

23(1  of 

m 

g 

CO 

© 

1— 1 

J’kim. 

Neb. 

Nob. 

M 

563 

835 

325 

24 

33 

20 

5 

Q 1 

15 

3 

562 

836 

326 

25 

34 

21 

6 

•§  2 

16 

a 4 

561 

837 

327 

26 

35 

22 

7 

« 3 

17 

§®o  5 

560 

838 

328 

27 

36 

23 

8 

S 4 

18 

• g S 6 

559 

839 

329 

28-29 

37 

24 

9 

'<  5 

19 

w • £ l 

558 

840 

330 

30 

38 

25 

10 

° 6 

!>  1 

I-  g 1 

557 

841 

331 

31 

39 

26 

11 

3 7 

B 2 

a <?  2 

55C 

842 

332 

32 

40 

27 

12 

g 3 

O HJ  n 

-1  o'  J 

555 

843 

333 

33 

41 

28 

13 

to  9 

57  4 

C P 4 

554 

814 

334 

34-35 

42 

29 

14 

a 10 

5 

* ^ 

553 

845 

335 

36 

43 

30 

15 

o 11 

6 

552 

846 

336 

37 

t!  1 

31 

16 

3 12 

7 

5 3 

551 

847 

337 

g 2 

32 

17 

a 13 

8 

550 

848 

338 

33 

18 

g 14 

9 

5 

549 

849 

339 

g§  2 

34 

19 

o 15 

10 

6 

548 

850 

340 

35 

20 

§T  10 

11 

7 

547 

851 

341 

ggg-4 

36 

21 

P.  17 

32 

8 

546 

852 

342 

° 2.21 

37 

22 

g 18 

13 

9 

545 

853 

313 

' gp2 

38 

23 

S 19 

14 

10 

544 

854 

344 

S&3 

39 

24 

5 20 

15 

11 

543 

855 

345 

o P4 

40 

25 

• 21 

16 

12 

542 

856 

340 

• • 5 

41 

26 

22 

17 

13 

CAPTIVITIF.8. 

S5 

o 

p 

W 

< 

◄ 

M 

P 

Ph 

Pm 

Cm 

3d  of 

18th  of 

23d  of 

O 

M 

g 

J’kim. 

Neb. 

Nob. 

M 

541 

857 

347 

42 

27 

23 

3 6 

Q 1 

18 

14 

540 

858 

348 

43 

28 

24 

g.  v 

^4  2 

19 

15 

539 

859 

349 

44 

29 

25 

g 8 

£ 3 

20 

16 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

53S 

537 

860 

861 

350 

351 

45 

46 

30 

31 

26 

27 

g 9 

£•  10 

4 

5 

21 

22 

17 

18 

536 

862 

352 

47 

32 

28 

P 11 

6 

23 

19 

B.C. 

B.C. 

B.C. 

535 

863 

353 

48 

33 

29 

“ 12 

7 

24 

20 

534 

864 

354 

49 

34 

30 

13 

8 

25 

557. 

585. 

527. 

533 

865 

355 

50 

35 

31 

14-15 

9 

26 

532 

866 

356 

51 

36 

32 

16 

10 

27 

531 

867 

357 

52 

37 

33 

17 

11 

28 

9 i 

530 

868 

358 

53 

38 

34 

1 

12 

29 

Hi  2 

529 

869 

359 

54 

39 

35 

O 2 

13 

30 

£ 3 

528 

870 

360 

55 

40 

36 

JA  3 

14 

31 

■ 4 

527 

871 

361 

56 

41 

37 

4 

15 

32 

5 

1 

526 

872 

362 

57 

42 

38 

glL,  5 

gS  6 

16 

33 

6 

2 

525 

873 

363 

58 

43 

39 

17 

34 

7 

3 

524 

874 

364 

59 

44 

40 

g ts  7 

' * 8 

18 

35 

8 

4 

523 

875 

365 

60 

45 

41 

19 

36 

9 

5 

522 

876 

366 

61 

46 

42 

M,  9 

20 

37 

10 

6 

521 

877 

367 

62 

47 

43 

10 

21 

38 

1 

11 

7 

520 

878 

368 

63 

48 

44 

11 

22 

39 

2 

12 

8 

168 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY, 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era  of 
Tabernacle. 

Years  of 

Iniquity  of  Israel. 

Captivities. 

Kings  of 
Persia. 

Kings  of  Egypt. 

Captivities. 

3d  of 
J’kim. 

18th  of 
Neb. 

23d  of 
Nob. 

B.C. 

557. 

B.C. 

585. 

B C. 

527. 

519 

879 

369 

64 

49 

45 

12 

23 

> 40 

3 

13 

9 

518 

880 

370 

65 

50 

46 

13 

24 

3 41 

4 

14 

10 

517 

881 

371 

66 

51 

47 

14 

25 

? 42 

5 

15 

11 

516 

882 

372 

67 

52 

48 

15 

26 

37  43 

6 

16 

12 

515 

883 

373 

68 

53 

49 

16 

27 

44 

7 

17 

13 

514 

88-1 

374 

69 

54 

50 

17 

28 

63  1 

8 

18 

14 

513 

885 

375 

70 

55 

51 

1 

29 

P 

9 

1 

15 

512 

886 

376 

e 1 

50 

52 

O 2 

30 

3 

10 

o 2 

16 

511 

887 

377 

■g  2 

57 

53 

P Q 

3 

11 

C 3 

17 

510 

888 

378 

31  3 

58 

54 

1 4 

CD 

12 

5-  4 

18 

§ 

509 

889 

379 

S 4 

59 

55 

5 

13 

5 

1 

508 

890 

380 

1 5 

60 

56 

1 f> 

14 

2 6 

S’2 

507 

891 

381 

3 (i 

61 

57 

” 7 

O 

15 

• 7 

3 2 

CO 

506 

892 

382 

P 7 

62 

58 

8 

w 

16 

8 

c*  4 

505 

893 

383 

~ 8 

63 

59 

9 

17 

9 

•<  c 

504 

894 

381 

(6  9 

64 

60 

10 

18 

10 

S 6 

503 

895 

385 

2 10 

65 

61 

e i 

O 1 

11 

' 7 

502 

896 

386 

? 11 

66 

62 

r-P  C, 

P -i  - 

s?  2 

12 

8 

501 

897 

387 

12 

67 

63 

13 

9 

500 

898 

388 

13 

68 

64 

rt>  w 4 

a>  “ 4 

14 

10 

499 

899 

389 

14 

69 

65 

" B 5 

5 

15 

11 

498 

900 

390 

15 

70 

66 

a 6 

a 6 

16 

12 

Captivities. 

Kings  of  Persia. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

3d  of 
J’kim. 

23d  of 
Neb. 

B.C. 

557. 

B.C. 

585. 

B.C. 

527. 

497 

16 

67 

O 7 

o 7 

17 

13 

496 

17 

68 

2 8 

2 8 

18 

14 

495 

18 

69 

S'  9 

S'  9 

O 1 

15 

Second  capture  of  Babylon 

494 

19 

70 

“ 10 

“ 10 

3 2 

16 

following  the  insurrection 

493 

20 

1 

E 11 

K 11 

S'  3 

17 

ofAracust?).  Behistun  in- 

492 

21  ’ 

£5  2 

12 

H 12 

“ 4 

18 

scription. 

491 

o'  3 

S'  13 

p 13 

W 6 

1 

490 

& 4 

*3  14 

•3  14 

S,  6 

2 

489 

2,  5 

S 15 

g 15 

S 7 

3 

488 

to  6 

• 16 

• 16 

4 

487 

W V 

17 

17 

g 9 

5 

486 

8 

18 

18 

• 10 

6 

485 

9 

19 

1 

11 

7 

484 

20 

2 

12 

8 

483 

rp  11 

21 

3 

13 

9 

482 

2 12 

22 

4 

14 

10 

481 

£ 13 

23 

S 

15 

11 

4S0 

- 14 

24 

6 

16 

12 

479 

o 15 

25 

7 

17 

13 

478 

2 !6 

26 

8 

18 

14 

477 

2 17 

27 

9 

1 

15 

476 

2,  18 

28 

10 

2 

16 

1 * 1 

THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  169 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

r CJ 

© w N 

K*a 

b • 

O < 

W <Si 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

H Q < 

0h  CO  B 
HjCI  O 

O 

V*  w 

B.C. 

557. 

B.C. 

585. 

B.C. 

527. 

475 

19 

b 29 

b a 

b 3 

17 

474 

20 

g 30 

8 12 

g 4 

18 

473 

21 

31 

£ 13 

5'  5 

X o 

472 

% 1 

'<  “ 32 

•w  14 

.w  6 

2 i 

Babylon  captured  by  Darius  and 

471 

g 2 

S'  33 

15 

7 

X 2 

Xerxes. 

470 

o'  3 

•S  34 

16 

8 

C/3  3 

409 

O.  4 

1 35 

17 

9 

4 

468 

2,  5 

■ 36 

18 

10 

5 

467 

o 6 

X 1 

1 

11 

6 

466 

=5  7 

2 2 

2 

12 

7 

465 

2 8 

H 3 

3 

13 

8 

464 

9 

2 4 

4 

14 

9 

463 

O !U 

5 

5 

15 

10 

462 

2,  li 

6 

6 

16 

11 

461 

t)  12 

7 

7 

17 

12 

460 

g 13 

8 

8 

18 

13 

459 

2.  14 

> 1 

9 

1 

14 

458 

15 

& | 

10 

2 

15 

457 

o 16 

11 

3 

16 

456 

Z 17 

2 4 

12 

4 

17 

455 

to  18 

M 5 

13 

5 

18-1 

454 

'g  19 

2 6 

14 

6 

2 

453 

S 20 

1-1  7 

15 

7 

3 

452 

S 21 

8 

16 

8 

4 

451 

22 

9 

17 

9 

5 

450 

23 

10 

18 

10 

6 

449 

24 

11 

X 1 

11 

7 

448 

25 

12 

3 2 

12 

8 

447 

26 

13 

P Q 

13 

9 

446 

27 

14 

2 4 

14 

10 

445 

28 

15 

M 5 

15 

11 

444 

29 

16 

fD  /; 

16 

12 

443 

30 

17 

rH  7 

17 

13 

442 

31 

18 

8 

18 

14 

441 

32 

19 

9 

1 

15 

440 

33 

20 

10 

2 

16 

439 

34 

21 

11 

3 

17 

438 

35 

22 

12 

4 

18 

437 

36 

23 

13 

5 

1 

436 

37 

24 

14 

6 

2 

435 

38 

25 

15 

7 

3 

434 

39 

26 

16 

8 

4 

433 

40 

27 

17 

9 

5 

432 

41 

28 

18 

10 

6 

431 

42 

29 

1 

11 

7 

430 

43 

30 

2 

12 

8 

429 

44 

31 

3 

13 

9 

428 

45 

32 

4 

14 

10 

427 

46 

33 

5 

15 

11 

426 

47 

34 

6 

16 

12 

425 

48 

35 

7 

17 

13 

424 

49 

O 1 

8 

18 

14 

423 

8 2 

9 

b l 

15 

“Then  ceased  the  work  of  the 

422 

2 3 

10 

§ 2 

16 

house  of  God  which  is  at  Jerusalem. 

421 

4 

11 

C 3 

17 

So  it  ceased  unto  the  second  year  of 

420 

g-  5 

12 

X”  4 

18 

the  reign  of  Darius  king  of  Persia.” 

419 

418 

417 

416 

415 

414 

413 

g"  6 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

1 

8-  5 

CJ* 

0 

m 

1 

—Ezra  iv.  24. 

“And  this  house  was  finished  on 
the  third  day  of  the  month  Adar, 
which  was  in  the  sixth  year  of  the 
reign  of  Darius  the  king.” — Ezra  vi. 
15. 

15 


170 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


THE  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES  OF  JUDAH  AND  ISRAEL. 

The  chronology  is  peculiar.  There  was  more  than  one  reck- 
oning of  the  years  of  each  king.  A king’s  years  were  counfed 
by  the  decimestrial  year,  either  from  his  real  accession  or  from 
the  beginning  of  the  cycle  of  forty  years  immediately  following 
that  event.  Besides  these  two,  there  was  a reckoning  by  years 
of  twelve  months,  and  another  by  a cycle  of  two  periods  for  the 
return  of  an  eclipse,  or  thirty-six  plus  years.  As  a rule,  the 
years  are  reckoned  from  the  accession,  and  the  cycle  of  eclipses 
confirms  the  accuracy  of  the  regal  years  so  counted.  With  a 
chronology  made  of  such  mixed  elements  there  would  be  end- 
less confusion  were  it  not  that  the  Bible  has  preserved  certain 
synchronisms  between  the  two  lines.  To  reproduce  these  in 
the  table,  the  above-described  reckonings  of  years  are  employed, 
for  they  are  found  in  one  or  the  other  of  them. 

The  table  as  arranged  has  one  disadvantage.  In  order  to 
avoid  a cumbrous  length,  the  decimestrial  years  are  arranged  as 
they  fell  in  the  vague  year  of  twelve  months.  The  method 
adopted  in  the  Bible  of  giving  every  year  in  which  a king 
reigned  causes,  as  already  noticed,  the  first  and  last  years  of 
two  successive  kings  to  overlap.  For  example,  Nadab  began 
to  reign  in  the  second  year  of  Asa,  and  reigned  two  years,  and 
his  successor  Baasha  began  in  the  third  year  of  Asa.  This 
may  mean  either  between  the  second  and  third  of  Asa  a 
year  came  to  an  end,  which  was  reckoned  as  year  one  of 
Nadab,  and  a second  year  began  which  was  his  second,  year, 
he  not  reigning  even  one  full  year,  or  Nadab  completed  one 
full  year  reckoned  from  a date  in  the  second  of  Asa  to  the 
same  in  the  third  year  of  that  king,  and  continued  to  reign 
after  that  for  a portion  of  a second  year,  and  that  Baasha, 
who  began  in  the  third  of  Asa,  also  had  a portion  of  this 
third  year  for  his  first.  This  causes  these  years  to  crowd  each 
other  on  the  same  line,  which  would  not  be  the  case  if  each 
decimestrial  year  had  a line  to  itself.  This  is  further  compli- 
cated by  the  fact  that  the  line  of  Israel  has  a different  arrange- 
ment "of  the  decimestrial  years  from  that  of  Judah,  and  once 
in  every  cycle  of  five  years  three  decimestrial  of  the  line  of 
Israel  fall  in  the  same  vague  year  to  two  of  the  line  of  Judah. 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  171 


Fox*  tlie  line  of  Judah  the  order  of  decimestrial  yeai'S  followed 
in  the  first  chi-onological  table  is  continued.  It  began  in  b.c. 
1397,  the  era  of  the  exodus.  For  the  line  of  Isi-ael  a new 
series  of  ten-month  yeai'S  is  begun.  The  cycles  connected  with 
them  have  for  their  ei-a  the  fourth  year  of  Jeroboam  I.,  b.c.  885, 
and,  counting  back,  his  first  year  begins  with  the  tenth  month. 
The  two  cycles  of  five  yeai'S  use  the  same  months,  but  they  are 
divided  differently  into  decimesti-ial  years.  This  is  shown  in  the 
following  compax’ative  table : 

Months  divided  into  Decimestrial  Months  divided  into  Decimestrial 

Years  for  the  Line  of  Judaii.  Years  for  the  Line  of  Israel. 


B.C. 

Months. 

Years. 

Months. 

Years. 

888 

10-  2 

1-2 

9-  3 

1-2 

887 

1 

GO 

2-8 

7-  5 

2-3 

886 

6-  6 

3-4 

5-  7 

3-4 

885 

CO 

1 

4^5 

3-  9 

4-5 

884 

2-10 

5-6 

1-10-1 

5-6-1 

Each  of  the  minor  cycles  throughout  the  table  correspond  in 
the  manner  of  the  foregoing  table.  The  cycles  of  the  decimes- 
trial years  of  the  lino  of  Israel  are  not  in  the  table.  They  may 
at  any  time  bo  obtained  from  the  following  epochs: 


Cycle  I. 

begins 

with  fourth 

month, 

B.C. 

885 

“ II. 

it 

it 

eighth 

a 

it 

852 

“ III. 

tt 

tl 

tenth 

u 

tt 

818 

“ IV. 

tt 

tt 

fourth 

it 

a 

785 

“ V. 

tt 

It 

eighth 

tt 

it 

752 

“ VI. 

tt 

a 

tenth 

tt 

it 

718 

“ VII. 

it 

tt 

fourth 

tt 

tt 

685 

I have  adopted  this  an*angement  of  the  decimestrial  years  for 
two  l’easons, — its  convenience  in  l’egulating  the  regal  years  of 
the  table,  and  becaxxse  the  cycle  of  which  Jeroboam  II.  is  the 
eponym  begins  with  the  eighth  month.  This  eighth  month 
is  epochal,  and  pei’haps  the  fii’st  cycle,  which  began  in  885, 
should  begin  with  this  month  rather  than  the  fourth,  in  which 
case  that  of  Jei’oboam  II.  will  commence  with  the  tenth 
month.  Whichever  is  followed,  it  will  not  materially  affect  the 
table. 


172 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


JEROBOAM  I. 

Jeroboam  fled  to  Egypt  during  the  reign  of  Solomon,  and  it 
appears  be  there  became  Egyptianized.  When  ho  became  king 
be  resolved  to  institute  certain  forms  of  the  Egyptian  l’eligion 
among  his  people.  The  introduction  of  this  worship  raised  a 
barrier  between  Isi'acl  and  Judah,  and  it  was  by  this  and  other 
means  the  separation  was  to  be  made  permanent.  lie  made  two 
golden  calves,  and  set  one  up  in  Bethel,  and  the  other  in  Dan, 
“ and  this  thing  became  a sin.”  He  also  ordained  a feast  on  the 
fifteenth  day  of  the  eighth  month,  and  at  this  time  he  offered 
on  the  altar  at  Bethel,  and  burned  incense  to  the  golden  calf. 
He  appointed  priests  of  the  very  lowest  of  the  people,  who 
were  not  of  the  sons  of  Levi.  “So  he  offered  upon  the  altar 
which  he  had  made  in  Bethel  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  eighth 
month,  even  in  the  month  which  he  had  devised  in  his  own 
heart;  and  ordained  a feast  unto  the  children  of  Israel:  and  he 
offered  upon  the  altar,  and  burnt  incense.”  Jeroboam,  when  he 
instituted  this  worship,  had  deprived  the  Levites  of  their  priestly 
office.  They  left  Israel  and  came  to  Kehoboam  and  strengthened 
his  hands  thi'ee  years.  In  the  fifth  year  of  Rehoboam,  Shishak, 
king  of  Egypt,  came  against  Jerusalem  and  took  that  city. 
The  presumption  is  the  three  years  just  mentioned  came  to  an 
end  at  this  time,  they  corresponding  to  the  third,  fourth,  and 
fifth  years  of  Rehoboam,  which  places  the  departure  of  the  Le- 
vites from  Israel,  and  the  institution  of  the  new  worship,  in  b.c. 
885.  The  Egyptians,  according  to  Latin  and  Greek  writers, 
worshipped  three  deities  emblematized  by  the  bull, — Apis, 
whose  seat  was  at  Memphis,  the  bull  Mnevis  of  Heliopolis,  and 
the  Pacis  of  Hermonthis.  The  accounts  are  not  harmonious. 
Apis  was  sacred  to  the  moon,  and  Mnevis  and  Pacis  sacred  to 
the  sun,  and  again  the  three  were  all  sacred  to  Apollo  or  the 
sun.  It  is  held  by  some  that  the  worship  instituted  by  Jeroboam 
was  not  that  of  Apis,  but  of  Mnevis,  the  white  bull  worshipped 
at  Heliopolis.  Josephus  credits  Manetho  with  a story  which 
makes  Moses  a priest  of  Heliopolis,  thus  connecting  that  city 
with  the  sojourning  of  the  Jews  in  Egypt.  It  is  said  Jeroboam 
“ ordained  a feast  in  the  eighth  month,  on  the  fifteenth  day  of 
the  month,  like  unto  the  feast  that  is  in  Judah,  and  he  offered 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


173 


upon  the  altar.  So  did  he  in  Bethel,  sacrificing  unto  the  calves 
that  he  had  made.”  The  feast  in  Judah  in  the  seventh  month 
was  from  the  fifteenth  day  for  seven  days,  special  mention  being 
made  of  the  first  and  eighth  days  of  the  festival.  One  explana- 
tion of  this  maybe  that  as  the  Jewish  days  began  at  sunset,  the 
seven  days  were  counted  from  the  even  of  the  fifteenth  day, 
and  wore  the  16th,  17th,  18th,  19th,  20th,  21st,  and  22d  days 
of  the  month,  but  the  15th  was  also  a day  of  the  festival,  thus 
accounting  for  the  statement  that  the  festival  was  for  seven 
days,  while  mentioning  the  first  and  eighth  days  as  sabbaths. 
In  this  sense  the  festival  of  the  fifteenth  day  was  that  of  the 
eve  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles.  The  likeness  between  the  fes- 
tival established  by  Jeroboam  and  that  observed  in  Judah  was 
probably  confined  to  some  of  the  outward  forms  and  ceremonies, 
and  the  beginning  of  it  upon  the  fifteenth  day  points  to  the  fol- 
lowing of  the  same  order  of  the  days.  Without  hazarding  an 
opinion  whether  the  worship  of  the  golden  calves  was  that  of 
Apis  or  Mnevis,  or  of  both,  it  may  be  noticed  that,  according  to 
the  accounts,  the  Egyptian  festival  in  honor  of  Apis  lasted 
seven  days.  There  was  also  a superstition  that  during  the 
progress  of  the  festival  there  was  no  danger  from  the  crocodiles 
while  bathing  in  the  Nile,  but  that  this  immunity  ceased  after 
the  sixth  hour  of  the  eighth  day.  It  is  also  related  that  the 
festival  connected  with  the  inauguration  of  Apis  was  at  the 
time  of  new  moon. 

By  applying  the  same  rules  that  have  been  used  to  determine 
the  other  dates,  the  following  result  is  obtained  for  the  dates 
15th  and  16th  of  the  eighth  month,  b.c.  885. 

b.c.  885,  new  moon  on  July  13. 

“ “ “ Khoiakh  17. 

“ “ “ eighth  month,  sixteenth  day. 

On  the  fifteenth  day,  the  eve  of  the  feast,  the  moon  was  rising 
and  setting  in  conjunction  with  the  sun.  The  true  conjunction 
was  on  the  sixteenth  day.  The  star  Sirius  rose  heliacally  on 
the  13th  of  July  in  this  year;  it  did  so  on  the  16th  of  the  eighth 
month.  The  date  July  13,  b.c.  885,  was  also  that  of  a solar 
eclipse,  which  is  noticed  on  the  Assyrian  monuments. 

15* 


174 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


The  epoch  of  Jeroboam  I.,  b.c.  888,  the  1st  of  the  tenth  month, 
is  an  assumed  epoch.  The  chronology  of  the  line  of  Israel  ig- 
nores entirely  the  time  intervening  between  the  death  of  Solo- 
mon and  the  accession  of  Jeroboam  to  the  throne  of  Israel, 
which  belonged  to  the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  the  lawful  sovereign 
up  to  the  time  the  revolution  became  an  accomplished  fact. 
The  first  year  of  Rehoboam  follows  immediately  the  fortieth 
year  of  Solomon.  This  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  probable 
fact  that  he  began  to  reign  before  this.  The  previous  chronol- 
ogy has  been  shown  to  consist  of  eponymous  cycles  of  forty 
decimestrial  years,  and  a number  of  terms  of  office,  and  captivi- 
ties in  years  of  twelve  months.  The  hyjiothesis  in  explanation 
of  the  use  of  the  periods  of  forty  years  Avas  that  they  denoted 
cycles  of  Avhich  certain  persons  were  the  eponyms,  and  not 
necessarily  the  limits  of  their  actual  terms  of  office.  Rehoboam 
is  given  seventeen  years;  that  is,  he  reigned  seventeen  years 
after  the  forty  years,  Avhich  came  to  an  end  in  b.c.  888.  The 
twenty-second  year  of  Jeroboam  has  been  omitted  from  the 
table.  The  synchronisms  require  Asa  to  begin  his  reign  in  the 
twentieth  year  of  Jeroboam,  and  Nadab,  the  successor  of  Jero- 
boam, to  begin  in  the  second  of  Asa,  Avhich  leaves  a narrow 
margin  for  the  tAventy-second  of  Jeroboam;  for  Asa’s  second 
year  must  begin  in  the  twenty-first  of  Jeroboam,  and  Nadab’s 
first  year  in  the  second  of  Asa.  I am  of  the  opinion  that  the 
tAventy-two  years  of  Jeroboam  denoted  a period  for  the  return  of 
an  eclipse,  and  that  they  Avere  cyclic  in  character  ; the  tAvo  hun- 
dred and  tAventy -three  lunar  months  of  such  a period  being  di- 
vided into  twenty -tAvo  decimestrial  years,  with  three  intercalary 
months.  Such  a period  corresponds  to  tAventy-one  decimestrial 
years,  with  six  intercalary  months  by  the  Egyptian  year,  or 
tAventy-oue  years  Avith  nine  intercalary  months  by  the  Babylo- 
nian year.  This  in  the  table  will  reduce  the  years  of  Jeroboam 
one  year,  Avhile  accounting  for  the  presence  of  the  statements 
concerning  his  twenty-second  year.  The  use  of  such  a cycle 
connects  Jeroboam  with  an  eclipse  as  its  eponym  at  about  the 
time  he  became  king,  not  necessarily  one  in  the  year  b.c.  888, 
because  his  actual  epoch  may  not  have  been  in  this  year,  although 
the  one  he  assumed  was.  With  this  view  his  twenty-one  or 
twenty-tAvo  years  were  got  by  counting  back  to  the  year  510, 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  175 

era  of  the  tabernacle.  It  may  be  thought  singular  that  by 
doing  so  he  gets  for  the  length  of  his  reign  a period  of  decimes- 
trial  years  for  the  return  of  an  eclipse  when  possibly  the  proper 
period  had  not  terminated  at  his  death,  but  more  extraordinary 
things  than  this  may  happen.  The  twenty-two  years  of  Ahab 
will  bear  a similar  construction  and  so  far  support  the  hypoth- 
esis. The  cycles  of  eclipses  in  the  table  which  begin  in  b.c.  885, 
as  they  commence  almost  uniformly  in  the  first  years  of  certain 
kings  of  Israel,  confirm  the  chronology.  Jeroboam  I.  is  the 
eponym  of  the  first  one. 

OMRI. 

Omri  bogins  to  reign  in  b.c.  849.  In  this  year  the  second 
cycle  of  eclipses  begins.  The  record  does  not  state  the  year  in 
the  lino  of  Judah  corresponding  to  the  first  year  of  Omri.  The 
account  is  peculiar.  It  says  Omri  began  to  reign  over  Israel  in 
the  thirty-fii'st  year  of  Asa,  and  ho  reigned  six  years  in  Tirzah. 
The  next  item  is  Ahab  begins  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  Asa; 
that  is,  seven  years  after  the  thirty-first  year  of  that  king  ; so 
the  count  of  the  twelve  years  of  Omri  must  end  in  the  thirty- 
eighth  year  of  Asa  and  begin  with  his  twenty-seventh  year,  the 
year  in  which  fell  the  seven  days  of  his  predecessor,  Zimri. 
Zimri  had  conspired  against  Elah  and  slain  him  and  all  the 
house  of  Baasha.  After  a reign  in  Tirzah  of  seven  days,  Omri, 
the  captain  of  the  host,  who  had  been  made  king  by  tbe  Israel- 
ites, when  they  heard  of  the  act  of  Zimri,  came  against  him 
and  besieged  Tirzah.  When  Zimri  perceived  the  city  was  taken, 
he  set  on  fire  the  king’s  palace  and  perished  in  the  flames. 
After  this  there  was  a struggle  between  Tibni,  the  son  of  Gi- 
nath,  and  Omri,  because  half  of  the  people  followed  Tibni  to 
make  him  king.  This  was  finally  terminated  by  tbe  triumph 
of  the  party  of  Omri  and  the  death  of  Tibni.  It  may  be  con- 
cluded that  the  thii’ty-first  of  Asa  was  the  year  in  which  Omri 
became  the  undisputed  master  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  The 
fifth  and  sixth  years  of  Omri  are  for  a part  current  in  the 
thirty -first  year  of  Asa. 

JEHU. 

Jehu  is  the  eponym  of  the  cycle  of  eclipses  which  began  in 
b.c.  813.  This  fell  in  his  first  year.  From  this  point  on  down 


176 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


to  the  reign  of  Menahem  is  found  the  most  difficult  portion  of 
the  chronology.  The  table  contains  three  columns  of  years  for 
the  line  of  Israel.  The  first  is  a continuation  of  that  followed 
for  the  line  of  Israel  to  this  point;  the  second  contains  the 
reigns  of  Jehu,  Jehoahaz,  Jehoash,  and  Jeroboam  II.  in  years 
of  twelvemonths;  and  the  third  column  has  the  decimestrial 
years  corresponding  to  the  twelve-month  years  of  the  second 
column.  The  reason  for  this  double  reckoning  for  the  line  of 
Israel — for  there  are  only  two;  the  second  and  third  columns 
are  only  variants  of  one  reckoning — is  found  in  the  effect  pro- 
duced upon  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II. 

JEHOAHAZ  AND  JEHOASH  OE  ISRAEL. 

Jehoahaz  reigns  seventeen  years  and  Jehoash  sixteen  years. 
Jehoahaz  begins  in  the  twenty-third  year  of  Jehoash  of  Judah, 
and  Jehoash  in  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  this  king  of  Judah. 
The  difficulty  is  to  bring  the  seventeen  years  of  Jehoahaz  of 
Israel  within  the  fifteen  years  between  the  twenty-third  and 
thirty-seventh  jTear  of  Jehoash  of  Judah.  In  the  first  column 
of  the  line  of  Israel,  Jehoahaz  follows  Jehu,  and  his  first  year 
falls  rightly  in  the  twenty-third  year  of  Jehoash  of  Judah.  In 
the  second  column  of  the  line  of  Judah,  Jehoash  of  Israel 
begins  in  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  the  cycle  of  forty  years,  of 
which  we  may  conclude  Jehoash  of  Judah  became  the  eponym 
in  b.c.  798.  Jehoash  of  Israel  became  the  eponym  of  the  cycle 
of  an  eclipse  in  b.c.  777.  This  is  the  fourth  cycle  of  the  series. 
This  is  the  portion  of  the  history  in  which  the  gaps  in  the 
lines  of  Judah  and  Israel  occur,  and  this  condition  of  things 
may  explain  in  part  their  occurrence.  The  statement  of  the 
thirty-seventh  year  of  Jehoash  of  Judah  is  derived  from  the 
reckoning  of  the  second  column  of  the  line  of  Israel. 

Amaziah  begins  in  the  second  year  of  Jehoash  of  the  reckon- 
ing of  the  first  column  for  the  line  of  Israel. 

JEROBOAM  II. 

Jeroboam  II.,  in  the  first  column  of  the  line  of  Israel,  begins, 
in  accordance  with  the  Bible  statement,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of 
Amaziah.  Zachariah,  the  successor  of  Jeroboam  II.,  begins  to 
reign  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  Azariak.  In  this  year  also 


THE  HISTORICAL  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS. 


177 


terminated  the  forty-first  and  last  year  of  Jeroboam  II.  by  the 
reckoning  of  the  third  column  of  the  line  of  Israel.  This  cycle 
of  forty-one  decimestrial  years  is  the  fifth  of  the  series  reckoned 
from  b.c.  885  ; it  began  in  b.c.  752  with  the  eighth  month.  The 
forty-one  years  are  taken  to  be  lunar  years,  and  represent  forty 
years,  using  months  of  thirty  days,  and  are  put  in  the  table 
rendered  into  that  form.  At  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  Azariah 
the  reckoning  of  the  second  column  touches  and  harmonizes 
with  the  line  of  Judah.  It  thus  appears  that  the  placing  of 
Zachariah  at  the  thirty-eighth  jmar  of  Azariah  was  brought 
about  by  counting  the  reigns  of  Jehu,  Jehoahaz,  and  Jehoash 
as  full  years  of  twelve  months,  and  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  by 
the  cycle  of  forty  decimestrial  years. 

AZARIAH. 

The  statement  that  Azariah  began  to  reign  in  the  twenty- 
seventh  year  of  Jeroboam  II.  is  to  be  explained  to  mean  that 
he  became  the  eponym  of  a cycle  of  an  eclipse  in  that  year. 
This  was  a first  year  in  that  respect,  at  least. 

MENAIIEM. 

The  years  of  Mcnahem  are  those  of  twelve  months. 

PEKAHIAH,  PEKAII,  JOTHAM,  AHAZ,  AND  IIOSHEA. 

The  following  historical  statements  are  to  be  followed  for 
these  kings : 

Pekahiah  succeeded  Menahem  and  reigned  two  years  (II. 
Kings  xv.  23). 

Pekah  slew  Pekahiah  and  reigned  in  his  stead  in  the  fifty- 
second  year  of  Azariah  (II.  Kings  xv.  25,  27). 

Jotham  began  to  reign  in  the  second  year  of  Pekah  and 
reigned  sixteen  years  (II.  Kings  xv.  32,  33). 

Hoshca  slew  Pekah  in  the  twentieth  year  of  Jotham  (II. 
Kings  xv.  30). 

Ahaz  succeeded  Jotham  and  began  to  reign  in  the  seventeenth 
year  of  Pekah  and  reigned  sixteen  years  (II.  Kings  xvi.  1,  2). 

Pekah  and  Rezin  were  confederate  against  Ahaz  of  Judah 
(II.  Kings  xv.  37). 


178 


JEWISH  CHRONOLOGY. 


Hoshea  began  to  l’eign  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz  (II.  Kings 
xvii.  1). 

Some  of  these  are  apparently  conflicting  statements,  but  by 
inspection  of  the  table  it  will  be  found  that  they  are  all  carried 
out.  If  there  is  no  other  argument  to  favor  the  use  of  the  deci- 
mestrial  year  to  explain  Jewish  chronology,  this  portion  of  the 
history  will  furnish  one.  In  no  other  way  may  the  twentieth 
year  of  Jotham,  the  sixteenth  year  of  Jotham,  the  twentieth 
year  of  Pekah,  the  seventeenth  year  of  Pekah,  and  the  first  of 
Ahaz  be  brought  upon  the  same  chronological  line,  which  must 
he  done  to  conform  to  statements  of  the  Bible. 

Pekah  and  Rezin  were  confederate  against  Ahaz  of  Judah. 
By  the  table  the  last  year  of  Pekah  concurred  in  part  with  the 
first  year  of  Ahaz.  This  gives,  perhaps,  a too  narrow  margin 
for  the  confederation,  but  it  is  required  by  the  statement  of  the 
death  of  Pekah  in  the  twentieth  year  of  Jotham.  If  this  last 
statement  must  be  abandoned,  the  reign  of  Pekah  may  be  ex- 
tended three  years,  giving  him  twenty  years  of  twelve  months 
instead  of  twenty  years  of  ten  months. 

Another  explanation  is  suggested  by  the  similarity  between 
the  names  Jotham  and  Ahaz.  According  to  Assyrian  inscrip- 
tion, Jehoahaz  was  reigning  at  this  time.  Jehoahaz  has  been 
identified  as  Ahaz,  but  the  name  resembles  Jotham  as  much  as 
Ahaz.  It  is  possible  that  both  Jotham  and  Ahaz  had  the  same 
name, — Jehoahaz, — and  the  Jewish  chronicler,  in  order  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  two,  gave  Jotham  that  poi'tion  of  Jehoa- 
haz which  contained  the  element  Jehovah,  and  the  remainder 
of  the  name  to  Ahaz.  Jehoahaz  means  “whom  Jehovah  pos- 
sesses,” and  Jotham,  “Jehovah  is  upright,”  and  Ahaz,  “Posses- 
sor.” Ancient  chronologers  distinguish  between  kings  of  the 
same  name  in  a way  similar  to  this.  The  three  Psametiks  of 
the  twenty-sixth  dynasty  are  known  from  each  other  by  only  a 
slight  change  in  the  spelling.  These  kings  are  named  by  Afri- 
canus,  Psammeticus,  who  answers  to  Psametik  I. ; Psammu- 
this,  who  is  Psametik  II.;  and  Psammechites,  who  is  Psame- 
tik III.  The  confederation  was  between  Rezin  of  Syria  and 
Pekah  against  Jehoahaz  (Jotham).  In  the  twentieth  year  of 
Jotham  (Jehoahaz),  Pekah  was  slain  by  Hoshea.  This  was  fol- 
lowed by  a civil  war  or  an  interregnum  lasting  about  nine  years, 


THE  HISTORICAL,  CHRONOLOGY  OF  THE  JEWS.  179 

which  was  finally  put  to  an  end  by  the  Assyrians,  who  established 
Hoshea  upon  the  throne  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz  (Jehoaliaz). 
The  objection  to  this  is  that,  although  the  Assyrians  might  have 
confused  Jotham  with  Ahaz,  it  would  be  out  of  the  ordinary  for 
the  Jewish  historian  to  do  so. 

IIEZEKIAH. 

The  regal  years  of  this  king  are  found  in  the  table  in  the 
form  of  the  sabbatical  week  of  years.  This  arrangement  has 
been  followed  for  ITezekiah  for  reasons  connected  with  the  syn- 
chronous history  of  Judah  and  Assyria,  which  are  explained  in 
the  chapter  on  that  subject.  The  last  of  the  series  of  eclipses 
found  in  the  table  begins  in  B.c.  GG9,  in  which  year  fell  the  four- 
teenth year  of  ITezekiah. 

The  epochs  of  other  kings  in  the  table  have  eclipses.  For 
example,  Jeroboam  II.  begins  his  reign  in  b.c.  763,  in  which 
year  there  was  observed  a total  eclipse  of  the  sun  in  Central 
Asia  on  .Tune  15,  which  concurred  with  the  18th  of  the  eighth 
month  of  the  Jewish  year  as  laid  down  in  the  work.  The  reck- 
oning by  the  cycles  of  eclipses  does  not  necessarily  imply  that 
an  eclipse  was  always  observed  for  each  cycle.  Thirty-six 
years,  fifteen  houi's,  and  twenty-five  minutes,  plus,  was  known 
as  a period  for  the  return  of  the  same  eclipse. 

Applying  the  method  of  prediction  by  the  cycle,  the  eclipses 
of  these  cycles  will  be  visible  or  invisible  in  the  same  locality  as 
follows : 


b.c.  885,  July  13,  visible  in  the  aftornoon. 

“ 849,  August  4,  visible  in  the  morning. 

“ 813,  August  25,  invisible. 

“ 777,  September  16,  visible  in  the  afternoon. 

“ 741,  October  8,  visible  about  sunrise. 

“ 705,  October  29,  invisible. 

“ G69,  November  20,  visible  about  one  o’clock  p.m. 

The  remainder  of  the  chronology  is  treated  in  the  chapters 
upon  the  synchronous  histories  of  Assyria,  Babylonia,  and 
Persia. 


PART  III. 

JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS 
HISTORIES. 


% 


10 


CHAPTEK  XI Y. 


THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR. 

The  number  by  which  it  is  proposed  to  reduce  the  year  of 
the  era  of  Nabonassar  is  obtained  from  a variety  of  sources. 
While  the  effect  upon  the  era  is  to  bring  it  down  nineteen  years, 
as  the  changes  to  produce  this  are  made  at  several  places  in  the 
canon,  the  differences  between  the  new  and  old  epochs  are  not 
the  same  for  all.  The  alterations  are  principally  made  in  the 
Persian  portion  of  the  canon.  No  corrections  are  made  below 
the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.  The  regal  years  of  Ar- 
taxerxes  are  reduced  six  years,  from  forty-one  to  thirty-five ; 
those  of  Xerxes  from  twenty-one  to  eight  years;  and  those  of 
Cambyses  are  increased  two  years,  from  eight  to  ten.  Eight 
years  are  added  to  the  regal  years  of  Cyrus,  which  gives  him 
seventeen  instead  of  nine.  The  years  of  Nabopolassar  are  in- 
creased four  years,  giving  him  a total  of  twenty-five  instead  of 
twenty-one.  Those  of  Nebuchadnezzar  are  made  to  overlap  the 
last  thirteen  years  of  Nabopolassar  as  previously  raised,  and 
Esarhaddon  receives  twelve  years  instead  of  thirteen.  The 
total  of  the  reductions  is  thirty-three  years,  and  of  the  addi- 
tions fourteen  years,  and  the  difference  between  these  constitutes 
the  reduction  of  nineteen  years  for  the  era. 

It  is  asserted  that  the  present  condition  of  the  canon  is  cor- 
rect, because  it  is  fixed  by  the  eclipses,  which  are  recorded  as 
having  been  observed  on  dates  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
regal  years  of  certain  kings.  In  the  present  condition  of  the 
canon  the  1st  of  Thoth,  b.c.  747,  is  made  to  fall  on  the  26th  of 
February.  This  is  a wrong  date  for  the  Egyptian  year.  In 
Part  I.  of  this  work  the  correct  adjustment  between  the  Egyp- 
tian and  the  Julian  year  was  made.  It  was  proven  true  in 
many  instances,  some  later  and  some  earlier  than  the  year  b.c. 
747,  the  correct  adjustment  between  the  two  being  February 
23,  concurrent  with  the  1st  of  Thoth.  If  the  Egyptian  dates 

183 


184 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


in  the  canon  are  wrong,  there  is  no  objection  arising  fronPthem 
to  the  proposed  redaction  on  the  ground  that  by  so  doing  the 
dates  of  certain  eclipses  will  be  changed.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  the  months  and  days  of  the  dates  of  the  eclipses  are  correct, 
then  their  epochs  in  the  canon  must  have  been  changed,  account- 
ing, in  this  way,  for  the  wrong  adjustment  between  the  Julian 
and  the  Egyptian  year ; and  if  the  epochs  were  changed,  what 
becomes  of  the  correctness  of  the  canon  ? The  argument  might 
be  rested  here,  were  it  not  important  to  extend  it  to  the  length 
of  restoring  or  amending  the  list  of  Ptolemy  to  conform  to  his- 
torical truth. 

As  to  the  method  of  making  the  proposed  changes  there  are 
several  guiding  facts.  First,  the  years  of  the  canon  are  said  to 
be  astronomically  fixed  ; that  is,  certain  years  of  certain  reigns 
are  checked  by  the  eclipses  which  are  said  to  have  fallen  in 
them.  This  implies  a series  of  cycles  of  eclipses,  and  if  they 
can  be  traced  in  the  canon  they  will  render  important  aid  in  de- 
termining the  truth  of  the  matter.  Second,  there  are  some 
Egyptian  inscriptions  which  bear  upon  the  reigns  of  Catnbyses, 
Darius,  Xerxes,  and  Artaxerxes,  and  which  require  a certain  ar- 
rangement of  the  years  of  these  kings.  Third,  one  of  the  Egibi 
tablets  mentions  the  eleventh  year  of  Cambyses. 

The  proposed  changes  are  taken  up  in  their  order,  beginning 
with  that  affecting  the  earliest  reign. 


ESARHADDON. 

The  reduction  of  the  regal  years  of  Esarhaddon  one  year  is 
made  on  the  authority  of  the  Babylonian  chronicle,*  a document 
which  is  dated  of  the  twenty-second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspes. 

NABOPOLASSAR  AND  NEBUCHADNEZZAR. 

The  changes  connected  with  these  two  reigns  are  suggested  by 
the  chronology  found  in  Josephus’s  “Antiquities  of  the  Jews,” 
and  their  bearing  upon  certain  statements  made  by  Herodotus, 
and  synchronisms  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  To  avoid  repetition 
these  will  be  found  considered  in  the  chapter  upon  the  synchro- 


* “ Records  of  the  Past,”  New  Series,  vol.  i. 


THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR.  185 


nisms  between  Jewish,  Babylonian,  and  Persian  histories.  It 
may  be  noticed  here  that  the  temporary  effect  upon  the  canon 
is  to  lower  epochs  nine  years,  Nebuchadnezzar  overlapping  the 
twenty-one  years  of  Nabopolassar  in  the  canon  nine  years;  the 
four  years  added  to  Nabopolassar  only  affect  the  length  of  the 
joint  reigns  of  the  two.  This  nine  years  more  than  counteracts 
the  eight  years  added  to  the  reign  of  Cyrus. 

CYRUS. 

The  addition  of  eight  years  to  the  reign  of  this  king  is  made 
in  order  to  give  to  Cyrus  the  twenty-nine  years  which,  upon  the 
authority  of  Herodotus,  he  is  said  to  have  reigned.*  According 
to  Tyrian  annals  furnished  by  Josephus, f Cyrus  began  to  reign 
in  the  sixth  year  of  Nabonadius.  This  will  leave  for  the  interval 
between  the  fifth  year  of  Nabonadius  and  the  first  year  of  Cam- 
byses  twelve  years  of  Nabonadius  plus  nine  years  of  Cyrus,  or 
twenty-one  years,  which,  increased  by  eight  years,  complete  the 
twenty-nine  years  mentioned.  The  effect  of  the  other  changes 
to  be  made  in  the  canon  upon  the  epoch  of  Cyrus  will  be  to 
bring  it  to  b.c.  530,  which  is  the  epoch  of  the  first  year  of  Cam- 
byses  in  the  present  state  of  the  canon,  or  without  the  changes 
being  made. 

CAMBYSES. 

Mr.  Pinches  furnishes  two  facts  from  the  Egibi  tablets.  J One 
of  these  mentions  “ the  first  year  of  Cambyses,  King  of  Babylon, 
and  in  this  day  also  Cyrus,  his  father,  King  of  Countries.”  The 
other  records  the  eleventh  year  of  Cambyses.  These  eleven 
years  are  placed  so  that  the  first  of  them  overlaps  an  eighteenth 
or  last  year  of  Cyrus,  and  the  eleventh  year  falls  on  a line  with 
the  first  of  Darius  Hystaspes.  This  leaves  Cambyses  ten  years 
in  the  table. 

XERXES  AND  ARTAXERXES. 

The  Egyptian  inscriptions  affecting  these  reigns  are  those  of 
two  Persians  in  the  employ  of  Darius,  Xerxes,  and  Artaxerxes. 


* Book  I.  214. 

f “ Against  Apion,”  Book  I.  21. 

J Transactions  Soc.  Bib.  Archeology,  vol.  vi.  p.  485. 


16* 


186 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


One  of  these  memorializes  the  service  of  Ataiuhi  during  six 
years  of  Cambyses,  thirty-six  years  of  Darius,  and  twelve  years 
of  Xerxes.*  Another  inscription  of  the  same  person  declares 
he  had  lived  thirty-six  years  of  Dai’ius  and  in  thirteen  years  of 
his  son  Xerxes.  I A third  inscription  records  the  life  of  Aliurta, 
a Persian,  for  five  years  of  Artaxerxes  and  for  sixteen  years  of 
Artaxerxes.  J If  there  were  two  methods  of  counting  the  years 
of  these  kings,  one  by  regal  yeai*s  and  the  other  by  cyclic,  this 
may  explain  why  the  years  of  Artaxerxes  are  mentioned  in  the 
peculiar  manner  of  the  inscription  of  Aliurta.  The  thirteen 
years  of  Xerxes,  if  the  reduction  of  that  king’s  reign  from 
twenty-one  years  to  eight  is  to  stand,  may  be  explained  to  cover 
his  sole  reign  of  eight  years,  and  five  years  of  a joint  reign 
either  with  Darius  or  Artaxerxes. 

To  determine  the  series  of  eclipses  belonging  to  the  Persian 
poi’tion  of  the  canon,  attention  is  directed  to  those  of  B.c.  557, 
b.c.  585,  and  b.c.  527.  The  solar  eclipse,  B.c.  557,  May  19,  is  sup- 
posed by  modern  astronomers  to  be  the  one  mentioned  by  Xen- 
ophon as  having  been  observed  at  the  time  of  the  capture  of 
Larissa  by  the  Persians.  The  solar  eclipse  of  b.c.  585,  May  28, 
is  supposed  by  astronomers  to  be  the  one  predicted  by  Thales, 
and  to  have  been  observed  in  Asia  Minor  at  the  time  of  the 
battle  between  Cyaxares  and  Alyattes. 

The  series  of  b.c.  527  contains  tho  lunar  eclipse  of  b.c.  491, 
which  chronologers  usually  identify  as  the  eclipse  of  Darius 
Hystaspes’s  thirty-first  year.  These  eclipses  are  connected  with 
important  events  in  Persian  history,  and  majT  be  chosen  for  eras. 

The  following  table  displays  cycles  reckoned  from  each  of 
these  supposed  eras.  It  also  contains  the  proposed  changes  for 
the  regal  years  of  the  canon  and  the  Julian  epochs: 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xix.  p.  303. 
Eng.  trans. 
f Ibid.,  p.  304. 


t Ibid. 


THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR.  187 


Table  of  Eel  ipse- Cycles,  B.C.  527-^13. 


B.C. 

Canon  with 
the  Proposed 
Changes. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

557. 

585. 

52 

7. 

527 

o 

4 

1 

520 

3 

5 

2 

525 

5° 

6 

3 

524 

7 

4 

523 

8 

5 

522 

9 

6 

521 

10 

1 

7 

520 

11 

2 

8 

519 

12 

3 

9 

518 

13 

4 

10 

517 

14 

5 

11 

516 

15 

6 

12 

515 

16 

7 

13 

514 

17 

8 

14 

513 

(18) 

1 

9 

1 

15 

512 

2 

10 

o 

2 

16 

511 

£ 

3 

11 

3 

17 

510 

E 

4 

12 

4 

18 

509 

5 

13 

to 

5 

1 

508 

CD 

to 

6 

14 

6 

o 

2 

507 

7 

15 

7 

E 

3 

506 

8 

16 

8 

4 

505 

9 

17 

9 

CO 

5 

504 

10 

18 

10 

6 

503 

(11) 

1 

1 

11 

7 

502 

u 

p 

2 

P 

2 

12 

8 

501 

»-le 

3 

•-I. 

3 

13 

9 

500 

£ 

CO 

4 

to 

4 

14 

10 

499 

w 

5 

w 

5 

15 

11 

498 

n 

6 

CO 

6 

16 

12 

497 

in 

7 

7 

17 

13 

496 

CD 

in 

8 

CD 

8 

18 

14 

495 

9 

9 

1 

15 

494 

10 

10 

2 

16 

493 

11 

11 

3 

17 

492 

12 

12 

4 

18 

491 

13 

13 

5 

1 

490 

14 

14 

6 

2 

489 

15 

15 

7 

3 

488 

16 

16 

8 

4 

487 

17 

17 

9 

5 

486 

18 

18 

10 

6 

485 

19 

1 

11 

7 

188 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


Table  of  Eclipse- Cycles,  B.C.  527-J/.13  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Canon  with 
the  Proposed 
ClIANUES. 

Cycles  of  Eclipses. 

557. 

585. 

527. 

484 

20 

« 2 

12 

8 

483 

21 

2.  3 

13 

9 

482 

22 

So  4 

14 

10 

481 

23 

a 5 

15 

11 

480 

24 

2.  6 

16 

12 

479 

25 

1 7 

17 

13 

478 

26 

g>  8 

18 

14 

477 

27 

9 

1 

15 

476 

28 

10 

2 

16 

475 

29 

11 

3 

17 

474 

30 

12 

4 

18 

473 

31 

13 

5 

g o 

472 

32 

14 

6 

3 i 

471 

33 

15 

7 

73  2 

470 

34 

16 

8 

3 

469 

35 

17 

9 

4 

468 

06 

18 

10 

5 

467 

i 

1 

11 

6 

466 

X 2 

X 2 

12 

7 

465 

a 3 

a 3 

13 

8 

464 

8 4 

4 

14 

9 

463 

5 

5 

15 

10 

462 

6 

6 

16 

11 

461 

7 

7 

17 

12 

460 

8 

8 

18 

13 

459 

1 

9 

1 

14 

458 

2 

10 

> 2 

15 

457 

& 3 

11 

p 3 

16 

456 

a>  4 

12 

o 4 

17 

455 

i 5 

13 

* 5 

18-1 

454 

M 6 

14 

'P  6 

2 

453 

7 

15 

7 

3 

452 

8 

16 

8 

4 

451 

9 

17 

9 

5 

450 

10 

18 

10 

6 

449 

11 

1 

11 

7 

448 

12 

2 

12 

8 

447 

13 

3 

13 

9 

446 

14 

4 

14 

10 

445 

15 

5 

15 

11 

444 

16 

6 

16 

12 

443 

17 

7 

17 

13 

442 

18 

8 

18 

14 

441 

19 

9 

1 

15 

440 

20 

10 

3ET  2 

16 

439 

21 

11 

Pa  3 

17 

438 

22 

12 

4 

18 

THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR.  189 


Table  of  Eclipse- Cycles,  B.C.  527-4.13  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Canon  with 
the  Proposed 
Changes. 

Cycles  op  Eclipses. 

557. 

585. 

527. 

437 

23 

13 

5 

1 

436 

24 

14 

6 

2 

435 

25 

15 

7 

3 

434 

26 

16 

8 

4 

433 

27 

17 

9 

5 

432 

28 

18 

10 

6 

431 

29 

1 

11 

7 

430 

30 

2 

12 

8 

429 

31 

3 

13 

9 

428 

32 

4 

14 

10 

427 

33 

5 

15 

11 

426 

34 

6 

16 

12 

425 

35 

7 

17 

13 

424 

1 

8 

18 

14 

423 

£ 3 

9 

1 

15 

422 

3.  3 

10 

16 

421 

C A 

in  4 

11 

17 

420 

g 5 

12 

18 

419 

& 6 

13 

1 

418 

g 7 

14 

417 

8 

15 

416 

9 

16 

415 

10 

2$  17 

414 

11 

& 3.  18 

413 

12 

gg  1 

CYCLES  OF  THE  SERIES  OF  B.C.  557. 

The  first  cycle  of  this  series  to  be  noticed  is  the  one  begin- 
ning in  b.c.  503,  in  the  first  year  of  Darius  Hystaspes.  Darius 
reigned  thirty-six  years ; he  therefore  completed  two  cycles  of 
this  series.  The  next  cycle  began  with  the  first  year  of  Xerxes, 
his  successor.  The  last  cycle  of  this  series  noted  in  the  table  is 
the  one  which  began  in  b.c.  413,  the  twelfth  year  of  Darius 
Nothus.  The  recorded  eclipse  of  this  year  was  a lunar  eclipse 
on  the  27th  of  August. 

CYCLES  OF  THE  SERIES  OF  B.C.  585. 

The  first  of  this  series  to  be  noticed  is  that  of  B.c.  513.  In  this 
year  began  the  cycle  of  Cambyses’s  first  year,  the  first  year  of 
the  eleven  years  of  the  Babylonian  inscription,  and  the  one  in 


190 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


which  he  reigned  jointly  with  Cyrus;  the  record  is  “the  first 
year  of  Cambyses,  King  of  Babylon,  and  in  this  year  also  Cyrus, 
King  of  Countries.”  The  next  one  to  be  noticed  is  connected 
with  the  first  year  of  Artaxerxes.  The  last  one  to  be  noticed 
began  in  b.c.  423,  the  second  year  of  Darius  Nothus.  This  was 
the  year  following  the  expiration  of  the  seven  weeks  of  years 
of  Daniel,  which  denoted  the  time  at  which  the  persecutions  of 
the  Jews  ceased. 

CYCLES  OF  THE  SERIES  OF  B.C.  527. 

The  first  cycle  of  this  series  to  be  noticed  is  the  one  beginning 
in  b.c.  509,  by  which  a seventh  year  for  Cambyses  begins  in  b.c. 
503,  which  was  also  the  year  in  which  he  died.  The  second  is 
the  one  beginning  in  b.c.  473,  in  the  thirty-first  year  of  Darius 
Hystaspes.  It  marks  the  beginning  of  the  joint  reign  of  Darius 
and  Xerxes,  and  it  ended  in  the  fifth  year  of  Artaxerxes.  This, 
with  the  one  of  Artaxerxes  beginning  in  b.c.  459,  explain  the 
meaning  of  the  inscription  of  Aliurta.  To  illustrate  this  point, 
the  mode  of  denoting  the  years  of  this  cycle  are  changed.  All 
the  others  of  the  three  series  are  arranged  to  show  the  epochs 
in  which  each  year  began  ; this  cycle  displays  the  years  in  which 
each  came  to  an  end.  The  five  years’  joint  cyclic  reign  of  Xerxes 
and  Artaxerxes  are  the  last  five  years  of  the  same  cycle.  A 
recorded  eclipse  in  b.c.  491  was  of  the  moon,  April  25.  This 
was  in  the  thirty-first  of  Darius  by  the  canon  of  Ptolemy,  as 
that  list  now  stands,  which  is  exactly  one  cycle,  or  eighteen 
years,  earlier  than  the  epoch  of  his  thirty -first  year  as  brought 
about  by  the  pi’oposed  changes.  Whether  Xerxes  died  at 
the  end  of  his  sole  reign,  and  the  five  years  mentioned  by 
Aliurta  were  only  cyclic  joint  years,  or  whether  he  reigned 
jointly  with  Artaxerxes  five  years  longer,  is  not  determined  by 
these  cycles.  The  third  to  be  noticed,  and  the  last  in  this  series, 
is  the  one  beginning  in  419  b.c.,  and  the  sixth  year  of  Darius 
Nothus.  This  is  the  year  in  which  the  Jews  completed  their 
temple  at  Jerusalem.  If  there  is  a reason  to  be  given  for  the 
number  twenty-one  as  connected  with  the  years  of  Xerxes,  it 
may  be  that  it  was  obtained  from  his  cycle  of  eighteen  years, 
which  may  have  been  on  record  in  the  terms  of  decimestrial 
years.  The  same  applies  to  the  forty-one  years  of  Artaxerxes. 


THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR.  191 

This  king’s  first  year  began  with  the  cycle  of  b.c.  459.  His  sec- 
ond cycle  began  in  b.c.  441,  and  his  thirty-fifth  year  corresponds 
to  the  seventeenth  year  of  that  cycle.  The  eighteen  years  of 
the  first  cycle  equal  twenty-one  decimestrial  years,  and  the  seven- 
teen years  of  the  second  equal  nineteen  years  of  ten  months 
plus  five  months.  The  two  items  in  decimestrial  years  equal 
forty  years  plus  five  months,  therefore  the  thirty-fifth  year  of 
twelve  months  came  to  an  end  in  the  forty-first  year  of  ten 
months.  In  this  calculation  the  nine  intercalary  months  are 
placed  at  the  beginning  of  the  cycle,  and  are  not  counted,  but 
leaped  over.  They  throw  the  decimestrial  years  all  nine  months 
later  in  a comparison  between  them  and  a parallel  series  of 
twelve  months.  By  this  table  it  is  shown  that  the  proposed 
changes  cause  the  first  years  of  Cambyses,  Darius  Hystaspes, 
Xerxes,  and  Artaxerxes  to  have  the  first  years  of  cycles  reck- 
oned from  the  eras  of  two  great  historical  events  which  lie  at 
the  beginning  of  Persian  history,  one  of  which  is  connected 
with  the  birth  of  that  empire. 

It  is  not  claimed  that  each  of  these  cycles  was  commenced  by 
a visible  solar  eclipse,  but  that  they  wore  reckoned  from  eras 
connected  with  such.  The  region  in  which  they  might  have 
been  observed  was  as  extensive  as  the  Persian  empire. 

THE  ECLIPSE  OF  THE  SEVENTH  YEAR  OP  CAMBYSES. 

The  statements  in  the  Almagest  in  respect  to  the  eclipse  in 
the  seventh  year  of  Cambyses  do  not  agree  with  the  canon.  This 
eclipse  is  recorded  as  being  in  the  two  hundred  and  twenty-third 
year  of  the  era  of  Nabonassar,  in  the  seventh  year  of  Cambyses, 
and  on  the  17th-16th  of  Pbamenoth.*  According  to  the  received 
canon,  with  the  adjustment  of  February  26  the  seventh  year  of 
Cambyses  was  the  two  hundred  and  twenty-fifth  year  of  the  era. 
This  year  of  Cambyses  began  in  b.c.  523,  with  1st  of  Tlioth  con- 
current with  1st  of  January,  and  chronologers  have  found  the 
eclipse  of  this  seventh  year  to  be  the  one  on  July  16.  The 
Almagest  requires  the  eclipse  to  have  been  on  the  17th-16th  of 
Pbamenoth, — that  is,  about  midnight  on  the  17th  at  Babylon  and 
on  the  16th  at  Alexandria.  By  the  wrong  adjustment  between 


* Transactions  Soc.  Bib.  Archeology,  vol.  i.  p.  269. 


192 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


the  Egyptian  and  Julian  years,  July  16,  b.c.  523,  will  concur 
with  Phamenoth  17 ; but  by  the  correct  adjustment,  that 
of  February  23,  b.c.  747,  the  concurrent  date  for  July  16 
is  Phamenoth  20.  Since  the  Julian  year  was  not  in  exist- 
ence at  this  time,  the  only  particular  of  the  statement  found 
in  the  Almagest  which  is  adhered  to  by  the  identification 
of  the  eclipse  as  the  one  of  July  16  is  the  seventh  year 
of  Cambyses.  By  the  proposed  changes  in  the  canon,  the 
seventh  of  Cambyses  had  for  its  epoch  b.c.  507.  The  17th 
Phamenoth,  by  the  correct  adjustment,  concurred  in  this 
regnal  year  with  July  9,  b.c.  506.  This  was  also  in  the  two 
hundred  and  twenty-third  year  of  the  era  reckoned  from  b.c. 
728;  it  began  in  b.c.  507,  on  the  25th  of  December,  adjust- 
ment of  February  23.  The  full  moon  was  on  the  17th  of  Pha- 
menoth. Whoever  is  responsible  for  the  present  condition  of 
the  canon  had  in  view  an  eclipse  for  the  seventh  year  of  Cam- 
byses, and  the  canon  is  arranged  so  that  the  seventh  year  of 
Cambyses  may  fall  in  b.c.  523,  in  which  year  there  was  a lunar 
eclipse  at  Babylon,  about  midnight  on  the  16th  of  July.  If 
Sosigenes,  who  was  employed  by  Julius  Caesar  to  regulate  the 
Roman  year,  began  that  year  with  the  1st  of  January  at  the 
third  quarter  of  the  moon,  the  25th  of  December  of  the  common 
Julian  year  b.c.  46,  which  is  proven  to  be  the  case  in  Part  I., 
the  Julian  dates  will  be  seven  days  earlier,  and  July  16  by  the 
correct  Julian  will  correspond  to  July  9 of  the  incorrect  Julian. 
In  b.c.  506,  July  16  of  the  correct  Julian  concurred  with  Pha- 
menoth 17  by  tbe  correct  adjustment.  It  is  sufficient  to  state 
the  facts  to  demonstrate,  that  if  the  status  of  the  Julian  year 
and  the  Egyptian  year  are  in  any  way  dependent  upon  a lunar 
eclipse  in  b.c.  523  on  July  16  concurrent  with  Phamenoth  17, 
that  that  alone  may  determine  the  character  of  these  years  as 
recognized  by  cbronologists.  And  if  the  concurrence  of  July 
16  with  17th  Phamenoth  properly  belongs  to  b.c.  506,  it  will 
confirm  the  position  I have  taken,  that  the  present  status  of  the 
Julian  is  wrong,  and  as  the  adjustment  of  its  dates  to  the  Egyp- 
tian year  is  also  wrong,  the  combined  error  is  an  outcome  of  an 
effort  to  place  a lunar  eclipse  in  the  seventh  year  of  Cambyses 
on  July  16  concurrent  with  Phamenoth  17,  b.c.  523. 

One  of  the  three  particulars  of  the  eclipse  is  probably  cor- 


THE  REDUCTION  OF  THE  ERA  OF  NABONASSAR.  193 


rect:  the  17th  of  Phamcnoth,  or  the  year  of  the  era,  or  the 
seventh  year  of  Cambyses. 

There  was  a lunar  eclipse  on  the  15th  of  July  concurrent 
with  the  14th  of  Phamcnoth,  adjustment  of  February  26  in 
b.c.  531.  This  was  the  eighth  year  of  Cyrus  by  the  canon 
in  its  received  form,  counting  his  regnal  years  from  the  1st  of 
Thoth,  but  reckoning  from  a supposed  accession  after  Phame- 
noth  14,  this  will  be  in  a seventh  year.  This  was  also  the 
17th  of  Phamenoth  by  the  adjustment  of  February  23,  also  in 
his  eighth  regnal  year,  reckoning  by  the  1st  of  Thoth,  and  a 
possible  seventh  year,  counting  from  an  aceessional  beginning. 
An  argument  derived  from  the  conflict  between  the  statements 
of  Herodotus  and  Xenophon  in  reference  to  the  Persian  king 
who  invaded  Egypt,  may  be  brought  to  support  it  as  the  one 
originally  intended  by  the  Almagest,  upon  the  assumption  that 
Ptolemy’s  statements  have  been  tampered  with  to  render  plaus- 
ible the  present  condition  of  the  canon.  There  is  another  which 
may  be  connected  with  the  seventh  year  of  Cambyses.  By  ref- 
erence to  the  table  of  eclipse  cycles  it  may  be  seen  a cycle  be- 
gan in  b.c.  509,  Cambyses’s  fifth  year,  the  seventh  year  of  which 
fell  in  b.c.  503.  There  was  in  this  year  a lunar  eclipse  on  the  6th 
of  July  concurrent  Avith  the  15th  of  Phamenoth.  This  was 
Cambyses’s  last  year.  There  are  reasons  for  the  opinion  that 
the  death  of  Cambyses  Avas  connected  with  an  eclipse;  his 
death,  possibly  either  fifteen  or  one  hundred  and  seventy-six 
days  after  the  wounding  of  the  bull,  and  the  manner  of  it 
had  reference  to  that  of  the  Apis  bull  slain  by  him.  The 
story  given  by  Herodotus  has  been  doubted,  because  Cambyses 
has  been  found  represented  upon  the  monuments  Avorship- 
ping  the  Apis  bull.  Dr.  Brugsch’s  comment  on  this  is  “ in 
other  words,  that  the  Greek  story  of  the  slaughter  of  the 
Apis  by  the  mad  Persian  king  is  a mere  fiction  invented  for  the 
purpose  of  setting  in  a striking  light  the  Avickedness  and  op- 
pression of  the  foreign  tyrant.”*  But  a different  complexion 
is  put  upon  the  story  if  the  “ mere  fiction”  of  it  is  confined  to 
the  animus  of  Cambyses.  The  Apis  bulls  were  not  permitted 

* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  chap.  xix.  p.  291. 
Eng.  trans. 

17 


194 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


to  live  beyond  a fixed  period,  when  they  were  put  to  death. 
The  act  of  Cambyses,  if  contrary  to  the  prescribed  rule  of  the 
Apis  ritual,  must  be  looked  upon  as  a presumptuous  innovation, 
and  in  that  sense  simply  sacrilegious ; but  if  it  was  not,  he  is  ig- 
norantly supposed,  by  slaying  the  bull,  to  have  displayed  an  en- 
mity towards  the  worship,  which  could  not  rightfully  be  charged 
against  him  even  if  his  act  was  without  sanction  of  law. 

TIIE  ASSYRIAN  CANON  COMPARED  WITH  THE  CANON  OF  PTOLEMY. 

Mr.  George  Smith  adjusts  the  epochs  of  the  Assyrian  canon 
by  those  of  Ptolemy.  There  is  a close  correspondence  between 
the  two,  which  in  several  instances  fixes  the  epochs  of  certain 
eponyms  in  the  Assyrian  list.  One  of  these  is  found  in  the  As- 
syrian tablet,  which  mentions  the  first  year  of  Sargon  as  king 
of  Babylon  equivalent  to  his  thirteenth  year  as  king  of  Assyria.* * * § 
This  in  the  tablet  is  assigned  to  the  eponym  of  Mannu-Ki-assur- 
liha.  Arkeanus  in  Ptolemy  is  Sargon.  This  is  confirmed  by 
the  Babylonian  chronicle  and  the  second  Dynastic  tablet  from 
Babylon.f  By  giving  the  eponym  of  Mannu-Ki-assur-liha  the 
epoch  of  b.c.  709,  which  is  that  of  Arkeanus  in  Ptolemy,  all  the 
other  eponyms  in  a continuous  series  above  and  below  this  year 
are  furnished  with  their  epochs.  It  is  by  such  a process  that 
the  eponym  of  Bsdu-sa-rabe  falls  in  b.c.  763.  \ There  is  nothing 
wrong  in  the  method ; but  if  the  epoch  of  Arkeanus  is  to  be 
lowered  nineteen  years  in  accordance  with  the  lowering  of  the 
era  of  Nabonassar,  his  epoch  will  be  b.c.  690,  which  will  bring 
down  Esdu-sa-rabe  to  b.c.  744.  The  epoch  of  b.c.  763  for  Esdu- 
sa-rabe  is  one  advanced  by  Mr.  Smith  and  others  in  favor  of  the 
correctness  of  the  epochs  given  to  the  eponyms  of  the  canon. 
The  Assyrian  Canons  IY.  and  VII.  declare  the  sun  was  eclipsed 
in  the  eponym  of  Esdu-sa-rabe  in  the  month  Sivan.§  A total 
eclipse  of  the  sun  across  Central  Asia  has  been  found  by  mod- 
ern astronomers  to  have  been  observed  in  b.c.  763,  on  the  15th 
of  June  of  the  Julian  year,  ||  which  will  correspond  to  the  30th 
of  Sivan  in  an  ordinary  luni-solar  year  beginning  with  a month 

* “Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  86. 

f “ Records  of  the  Past,”  New  Series,  vol.  i. 

J “ Assyrian  Canon”  (Gr.  Smith),  p.  83. 

§ Ibid.,  pp.  46,  47.  ||  Ibid.,  p.  83. 


THE  REDUCTION  OP  THE  ERA  OP  NABONASSAR.  195 


Nisan,  which  has  its  full  moon  following  the  vernal  equinox,  that 
point  of  the  sun’s  course  coming  between  the  new  moon  at  the 
beginning  of  Nisan  and  the  full  moon.  It  is  possible  that  another 
eclipse  of  the  sun  was  observed  in  b.c.  744  on  the  15th  of  June. 
The  presumption  is  enough  in  its  favor  as  to  require  a demon- 
stration of  the  contrary  to  be  made  by  an  exact  calculation. 
Mr.  Smith  claims  that  the  regal  years  in  Ptolemy  are  all  one  year 
too  low  in  their  epochs.*  Of  the  Assyrian  practice  he  affirms 
the  regal  years  were  in  most  instances  reckoned  from  the  New- 
Year’s  day  following  the  accession.  He  admits  the  custom  was 
not  uniform,  and  cites  a number  of  reigns  which  reckoned  the 
year  of  the  accession  as  being  the  first  year.f  Professor  Oppert, 
on  the  contrary,  holds  that  the  Assyrian  practice  was  like  that  of 
all  other  countries  in  ancient  and  modern  times,  to  calculate  the 
reigns  from  the  date  of  the  accession.  J In  the  canon  of  Ptol- 
emy, for  the  reason  that  the  regal  years  are  given  as  complete 
years,  and  reckoned  from  the  1st  of  Thoth,  the  real  accession 
must  lie  either  before  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  a first  year  or  after 
it.  The  view  that  it  fell  before  is  advocated  by  Mr.  Smith. 
The  most  reasonable  view  of  the  rule  followed  by  Ptolemy  is 
that  he  reckoned  the  years  from  the  1st  of  Thoth  preceding  the 
accession,  and  when  there  was  an  interregnum  following  the 
death  of  a king,  which  was  not  noticed  in  the  list,  still  to  count 
the  years  of  the  next  succeeding  king  from  the  1st  of  Thoth 
preceding  his  accession,  and  so  much  of  the  time  of  the  inter- 
regnum as  went  before  this  1st  of  Thoth  was  given  to  the  pre- 
vious reign.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  Babylonian  chronicle  in 
the  case  of  the  accession  of  Esarhaddon.  Sennacherib,  his 
father,  was  slain  on  the  20th  of  Tebet.  The  chronicle  declares 
that  a period  of  insurrection  lasted  from  the  20th  of  Tebet  to 
the  2d  of  Adar,  and  that  Esarhaddon  sat  on  the  throne  on  the 
8th  of  Sivan.  In  b.c.  661,  which  is  Esarhaddon’s  epoch  in  Ptol- 
emy reduced  nineteen  years,  the  vernal  equinox  was  on  the  28th 
of  March;  the  full  moon  was  on  the  14th  of  April,  about  seven- 
teen days  after  the  vernal  equinox.  The  preceding  luni-solar 
year  was  intercalated  with  the  additional  lunar  month  Ye  Adar. 


* “Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  102.  f Ibid.,  p.  21. 

1 Transactions  Soc.  Bib.  Archaeology,  vol.  vi.  p.  2G1. 


196 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


The  1st  of  Nisan,  b.c.  661,  began  on  the  31st  of  March.  From 
the  20th  of  Tebet  to  the  2d  of  Adar  was  a period  of  insurrec- 
tion  which  terminated  with  the  supremacy  of  Esarhaddon  on 
the  2d  of  Adar.  Between  the  2d  of  Adar  and  the  1st  of  Nisan 
is  a period  of  fifty-eight  days,  or  two  lunar  months,  Adar  and 
Ye  Adar,  minus  one  day.  In  b.c.  661  the  1st  of  March  fell  on 
the  29th  of  Thoth,  and  as  the  1st  of  Nisan  concurred  with 
March  31,  the  1st  of  Thoth  fell  before  the  1st  of  Nisan  28  -f-  30 
days,  or  fifty-eight  days,  which  is  the  same  number  of  days 
found  to  have  intervened  between  the  2d  of  Adar  and  the  1st 
of  Nisan ; therefore  the  1st  of  Thoth  concurred  with  the  2d  of 
Adar  and  the  end  of  the  insurrection.  The  accession  of  Esar- 
haddon was  on  the  8th  of  Sivan,  and  his  regal  years  are  reck- 
oned from  the  1st  of  Thoth  preceding  that  event.  This  1st  of 
Thoth  is  by  the  adjustment  of  February  23,  b.c.  747,  the  cor- 
rectness of  which  is  again  confirmed. 

If  the  list  of  the  regnal  years  of  Ptolemy  beginning  in  b.c. 
747  be  placed  side  by  side  with  one  of  Assyrian  kings,  with 
their  epochs  as  determined  by  Mr.  Smith,  the  twelfth  year  of 
Esarhaddon  in  Ptolemy  falls  on  a line  with  the  thirteenth  and 
last  year  of  Esarhaddon  in  the  Assyrian  list.  According  to  the 
Babylonian  chronicle,  Esarhaddon  reigned  only  twelve  years. 
Ptolemy  gives  Esarhaddon  thirteen  years,  the  same  number  as 
found  for  him  by  Mr.  Smith.  The  Babylonian  chronicle  bears 
every  mark  of  being  a carefully-prepared  document,  and,  as  far 
as  it  goes,  confirms  Ptolemy  in  every  particular  except  for  the 
number  of  years  given  to  Esarhaddon.  Ptolemy  has  for  the 
third  item  in  his  list  Khinzeros  and  Poros  with  a reign  of  five 
years.  The  Babylonian  chronicle  particularizes  the  reigns  of 
these:  Ykin-zira  (Khinzeros)  reigned  three  years  and  in  his 
third  year  was  captured  by  Tiglath  Pileser,  king  of  Assyria. 
Tiglath  Pileser  (Poros)  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  Babylon  and 
reigned  two  years,  dying  in  the  month  Tebet,  in  his  second 
year.  The  chronicle  assigns  the  two  interregna  in  Ptolemy  to 
the  reign  in  Babylon  of  Sennacherib.  If  the  Babylonian  chron- 
icle is  right,  it  is  a most  credible  witness  ; the  reign  of  Esarhad- 
don came  to  an  end  in  exactly  the  same  year  as  that  assigned  to 
the  last  year  of  that  king  in  the  Assyrian  canon  by  Mr.  Smith. 
The  thirteen  years  are  obtained  by  calculating  the  reign  one 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  JEWISH  AND  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY.  197 


whole  year  back  either  to  the  1st  of  Thoth  or  Misan  pi’evious  to 
the  death  of  Sennacherib.  Mr.  Smith,  while  adjusting  the  epo- 
nyms  of  the  Assyrian  canon  by  the  epochs  furnished  by  Ptol- 
emy, calculates  the  regal  years  one  year  higher.  He  places 
Sargon’s  first  year  in  b.c.  722,  which  will  cause  his  fourteenth  in 
Assyria  to  fall  on  a line  with  the  first  year  of  Arkeanus,  and 
not  the  thirteenth  year,  as  required  by  the  inscription  of  Sargon 
already  noticed,  by  means  of  which  the  Assyrian  canon  and  the 
canon  of  Ptolemy  are  adjusted  to  each  other. 

Epochs  of  Assyrian  Kings  followed  in  this  Booh. 


b.c.  840. 

Shalmaneser, 

reign 

35 

years 

“ 805. 

Samsi-vul, 

1C 

13 

Cl 

“ 792. 

Vul-nirari, 

Cl 

29 

Cl 

“ 7G3. 

Shalmaneser, 

it 

10 

Cl 

“ 753. 

Assur-daan, 

Cl 

18 

Cl 

“ 735. 

Assur-nirari, 

Cl 

9 

n 

“ 726. 

Tugulti-paleser, 

Cl 

19 

tc 

“ 707. 

Shalmaneser, 

ic 

5 

Cl 

“ 702. 

Sargon, 

Cl 

17 

Cl 

“ G85. 

Sennacherib, 

u 

24 

Cl 

“ 661. 

Esarhaddon, 

Cl 

12 

Cl 

“ 649. 

Assurbanipal, 

Cl 

20 

Cl 

“ 629. 

Ki-neladinos, 

Cl 

22 

It 

CHAPTER  XV. 

POINTS  OF  CONTACT  BETWEEN  JEWISH  AND  EGYPTIAN  HISTORY. 

The  first  point  of  contact  we  have  to  do  with  is  the  departure 
of  the  Jews  from  Egypt.  This  event  is  placed  in  b.c.  1397. 
The  epoch  of  Aahmes,  the  Amos  of  Africanus,  is  estimated  to 
be  at  b.c.  1396  by  means  of  the  age  of  the  warrior,  Pen  Nukheb, 
who  served  under  Aahmes,  and  finished  his  career  under  Thut- 
mes  III.  This  epoch  is  not  too  low.  The  events  of  Egyptian 
history  preceding  the  reign  of  Aahmes  are  such  as  mai’k  a 
period  of  disorganization  and  civil  strife.  An  interregnum  of 
disorder  prevailed  in  Egypt.  This  is  described  in  the  Sallier 

17* 


198 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


Papyrus,*  which  relates  events  believed  to  have  been  the 
beginning  of  the  change  brought  about  by  the  victorious  arms 
of  Aahmes.  The  opening  words  of  the  Papyrus  are,  “ It  came 
to  pass  that  the  land  of  Egypt  belonged  to  enemies.  And 
nobody  was  lord  in  the  day  when  that  happened.” 

The  much-mooted  question,  Who  was  the  Pharaoh  “ which 
knew  not  Joseph”  ? is  probably  unanswerable.  If  Egypt  at  this 
time  was  divided  into  petty  principalities,  or  if  the  dominant 
power  or  powers  in  the  Delta  were  different  from  that  reigning 
in  the  upper  parts  of  Egypt,  the  title  of  Pharaoh  may  have 
been  claimed  and  borne  simultaneously  by  more  than  one  prince. 
Aahmes  appears  as  the  representative  of  the  dynasty  of  Thebes. 
He  conquers  Avaris,  subdues  every  opposing  power,  and  assumes 
the  sovereignty  over  the  whole  land  of  Egypt. 

Immediately  before  this  consummation,  and  probably  an  im- 
portant aid  to  it,  the  Jews  depart  from  Egypt,  and  the  army  of 
Pharaoh  is  overthrown  in  the  Red  Sea.  The  history,  as  far  as 
known,  requires  an  enmity  to  exist  between  the  reigning  power 
at  Thebes  and  those  who  ruled  over  that  part  of  Egypt  which 
was  assigned  to  the  Jews  for  their  home. 

All  the  conditions  of  the  story  of  the  exodus  are  found  in 
this  part  of  the  history. 

Writers  have  claimed  that  the  Bible  statement,  that  Pharaoh 
and  his  army  perished  in  the  Red  Sea,  means  not  that  Pharaoh 
himself  died  at  this  time,  but  that  it  was  his  army  alone  which 
came  to  a disastrous  end.  But  it  seems  more  in  consonance 
with  the  Bible  to  place  the  exodus  before  the  reign  of  Aahmes, 
because  the  persecution  began  some  eighty  years  before  the 
event  of  the  exodus,  and  this  view  does  not  interfere  with  a 
strict  construction  of  the  account. 

The  next  point  of  contact  between  the  Egyptians  and  the 
Jews  takes  place  in  the  time  of  Thutmes  III. 

This  is  explained  in  the  recent  controversy  between  W.  Rob- 
ertson Smith  and  Reginald  Stuart  Poole.  Mr.  Poole  writes  the 
following  for  a recent  number  of  the  Contemporary  Review  :f 
“ More  than  five-and-twenty  years  ago  M.  de  Rouge  published 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  p.  239.  Eng.  trans. 
f September,  1887. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  JEWISH  AND  EGYPTIAN  HISTOKY.  199 

an  essay  on  the  then  newly-discovered  record  of  the  campaign 
in  which  the  Egyptian  king,  Thutmes  III.,  defeated  the  great 
Syrian  confederacy,  near  Megiddo,  about  b.c.  1600.  The  story 
is  accompanied  by  a list  of  the  conquered,  consisting  of  the 
nations  who  surrendered  at  Megiddo,  perhaps  partly  of  towns 
actually  taken,  partly  of  nations  or  tribes  subdued,  but  mainly 
of  the  nationality  of  contingents  in  the  hostile  army  defeated 
in  the  first  battle  of  Megiddo,  and  which  afterwards  surren- 
dered. The  names  comprise  such  well-known  ones  as  Megiddo, 
Damascus,  Shunem,  and  others;  it  being  noticeable  that  some 
names  occur  in  a correct  geographical  connection,  as  indicating 
a line  of  march,  while  others  do  not.  Among  the  names  M.  de 
Rouge  detected  Iaakab-ara,  the  name  of  Jacob,  written  with 
the  subject;  this  is  precisely  like  Nathan,  ‘he  gave,’  and 
Nathaniel,  ‘ God  gave.’  An  Egyptologist  of  the  French  school, 
M.  Groff,  has  recently  developed  this  argument,  and  also  traced 
the  name  of  Joseph  in  the  list  in  the  parallel  form  of  Yeshep- 
ara.  From  this  it  would  appear  that  about  one  hundred  and 
fifty  years  after  the  rule  of  Joseph  began,  the  tribes  of  Jacob 
and  Joseph — the  eminence  of  Joseph’s  descendants  being  already 
established — took  military  service  out  of  Egypt,  and  with  the 
enemies  of  the  Egyptians.  Nothing  would  seem  more  revolu- 
tionizing to  Hebrew  history,  but  nothing  suffers  save  our  ideas 
of  what  that  history  was.”  Mr.  Smith  replies  to  this  in  the 
next  number  of  the  Review  :*  “ Now,  even  as  Mr.  Poole  inter- 
prets the  thing,  it  is  surely  a very  strong  argument  against  the 
antiquity  of  the  Pentateuch  that  it  knows  nothing  of  so  impor- 
tant an  incident.  If  the  Hebrews  were  in  arms  against  Egypt 
two  hundred  years  before  the  exodus,  it  is  evident  that  the 
whole  story  in  Exodus  i.  rests  on  extremely  defective  informa- 
tion, and  has  little  historical  value.  But  Mr.  Poole  forgets  to 
mention  that  the  names  which  he  takes  to  be  those  of  Jacob  and 
Joseph  occur  in  a ‘list  of  the  districts  of  Palestine  which  his 
Majesty  conquered  at  Megiddo,  and  whose  children  he  carried 
to  Thebes.’  Therefore,  if  there  is  anything  in  the  proposed 
identification,  there  were  tribes  of  Jacob  and  Joseph  settled  in 
Palestine  two  hundred  yeai-s  before  the  exodus.  If  these  are, 


* October,  1887. 


200 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


as  Mr.  Poole  supposes,  the  same  Jacob  and  Joseph  as  we  read 
of  in  the  Bible,  it  will  hardly  be  possible  to  resist  the  conclusion 
which  is  drawn  by  E.  Meyer  (in  Stade’s  ‘ Zeitschrift’  for  1886), 
that  the  sons  of  Jacob  never  were  in  Egypt,  and  that  the  name 
of  Jacob  originally  belonged  to  a Palestinian  tribe,  one  of  many 
out  of  which  the  later  nation  of  Israel  was  formed.  It  is  right 
to  say  that  Meyer  is  by  no  means  confident  about  the  identifi- 
cation of  Yshp’r  with  Joseph,  which  in  fact  is  open  to  grave 
philological  objections, — far  too  grave  to  allow  a sober  historian 
to  build  on  it.  The  other  identification  deserves  more  consid- 
eration ; but  to  leap  at  once  to  the  conclusion  that  the  biblical 
Jacob  is  meant  is,  on  the  part  of  an  apologetical  writer,  a step 
that  shows  much  more  courage  than  prudence.” 

In  Part  I.  of  this  work  it  has  been  shown  that  the  battle  of 
Makitha  (Megiddo)  was  fought  on  the  21st  of  Pachons,  concur- 
rent with  April  1,  b.c.  1315.  This  was  over  eighty  years  after 
the  exodus  of  b.c.  1397.  Further  comment  upon  this  supposed 
conflict  between  the  Pentateuch  and  Egyptian  monuments  is 
unnecessary. 

INVASION  OF  JUDAH  BY  SHISHAK. 

In  Part  I.  the  epoch  of  Shishak  is  put  at  B.c.  894-886.  This 
is  obtained  from  the  reign  of  Takelath  II.,  a king  of  this 
dynasty,  whose  epoch  is  about  at  b.c.  846.  The  epoch  of  the 
first  year  of  Shishak,  calculated  back  from  this,  using  data  fur- 
nished by  the  monuments,  and  an  average  derived  from  the 
statements  of  Africanus  and  Eusebius,  was  about  b.c.  894-886. 
The  fifth  year  of  Rehoboam,  in  which  the  invasion  of  Judah 
took  place,  is  in  the  chronology  of  this  work  at  b.c.  884. 

TIRHAKAH. 

Tirhakah  is  mentioned  in  the  Bible  in  connection  with  the 
invasion  of  Judah  by  the  Assyrian  king  Sennacherib  during  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah.  Tirhakah  begins  to  reign,  according  to  the 
chronology,  founded  in  part  upon  the  Apis  tablets,  in  b.c.  682  or 
678.  Hezekiah,  in  the  chronology  of  this  work,  also  begins  to 
reign  in  b.c.  682.  The  twenty-six  or  more  years  which  Tirhakah 
reigned  place  him  upon  the  throne  of  Egypt  at  the  time  of  the 
attack  of  Sennacherib  upon  Judah. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  201 


NECHO. 

King  Josiah  endeavored  to  stop  the  march  of  Necho  against 
Carchemish.  Necho  began  to  reign,  according  to  the  chro- 
nology followed,  in  b.c.  598,  and  his  reign  came  to  an  end  in  b.c. 
582.  The  first  epoch,  b.c.  598,  is  that  of  the  sixteenth  and  sev- 
enteenth years  of  Josiah,  and  the  last,  b.c.  582,  is  that  of  the 
fourth  and  fifth  years  of  Jehoiakim.  His  reign  covers  the  time 
of  the  battle  at  Megiddo  with  Josiah,  and  it  ends  at  the  time 
where  the  Bible  places  Necho’s  defeat  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and 
the  loss  of  “from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  river  Euphrates 
all  that  pertained  to  the  king  of  Egypt.” 

HOPHRA. 

Hophra  began  to  reign  in  b.c.  577,  and  his  reign  terminated 
in  b.c.  559-560.  His  reign  covers  the  events  in  Jewish  history 
with  which  he  is  connected  in  the  Bible,  the  year  of  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem  concurring  with  his  eleventh  year. 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

POINTS  OF  CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY. 

SHALMANESER  II. 

The  first  year  of  Saliman-uzur  (Shalmaneser  II.)  is  placed  by 
Mr.  George  Smith  at  b.c.  860.*  By  the  Assyrian  canon  he  was 
eponym  in  the  year  b.c.  858.  Exactly  the  thirty-first  year  after 
this  (b.c.  828),  Shalmaneser  is  again  the  eponym.  This  is  con- 
firmed by  his  inscription,  which  relates  that  he  celebrated  a 
second  time  a cyclical  feast  in  his  thirty-first  year.f  The  two 
eponyms  are  separated  by  thirty  years.  The  epoch  b.c.  858  is 
the  epoch  assumed  by  Mr.  Smith  for  the  third  year  of  Shal- 
maneser. As  Shalmaneser  probably  ascended  the  throne  in  the 


* “ Assyrian  Canon”  (G-.  Smith),  p.  199. 
f “Records  of  the  Past”  (Black  Obelisk),  vol.  v. 


202 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHKONOUS  HISTORIES. 


year  previous  to  that  of  which  he  was  the  eponym,  the  epoch 
of  his  first  year  will  be  b.c.  859.  This  allows  his  real  first  year, 
reckoned  from  his  accession,  to  be  still  current  when  he  became 
eponym.  An  inscription  relates  that  in  his  sixth  year  he  was 
engaged  in  a war  with  Ben-hadar,  of  Syria,  and  other  confed- 
erate kings.  Another  recounting  this  war  informs  us  that  the 
expedition  was  in  the  eponym  of  Dayan-assur.*  The  eponym  of 
Dayan-assur  is,  according  to  the  epochs  given  to  the  canon  by 
Mr.  Smith,  in  b.c.  854.  This  is  the  sixth  year  reckoned  from 
b.c.  859.  These  epochs  are  to  be  reduced  nineteen  years  to 
agree  with  the  canon  of  Ptolemy  when  lowered  that  many. 
The  epoch  of  the  first  year  becomes  B.c.  840,  that  of  Shalmane- 
ser’s first  eponym  b.c.  839,  that  of  his  second  b.c.  809,  and  that 
of  his  sixth  year  b.c.  835.  In  the  Jewish  chronology  of  this 
work  Ahab  begins  to  reign  over  Israel  in  b.c.  840,  the  same 
year  in  which  Shalmaneser  began.  Ahaziah,  the  successor  of 
Ahab,  has  for  his  epoch  b.c.  824,  which  is  that  of  the  seventeenth 
of  Shalmaneser.  Jehoram,  the  successor  of  Ahaziah,  begins  in 
b.c.  823,  which  is  the  epoch  of  the  eighteenth  year  of  Shal- 
maneser. Jehu,  who  followed  Jehoram  on  the  throne  of  Israel, 
began  to  reign  in  b.c.  813 ; this  was  the  epoch  of  the  twenty- 
eighth  year  of  Shalmaneser. 

There  are  inscriptions  which  relate  of  campaigns  carried  on 
by  Shalmaneser  against  Ben-hadar  and  confederate  kings  in  his 
sixth,  tenth,  eleventh,  and  fourteenth  years.  Ahab  is  men- 
tioned f in  the  campaign  of  his  sixth  year,  which  was  also  the 
sixth  year  of  Ahab  by  the  chronology  of  this  work. 

An  inscription  J of  the  eighteenth  year  of  Shalmaneser  relates 
that  in  that  year  he  was  engaged  in  a war  with  Hazael,  of 
Damascus,  the  son  and  successor  of  Ben-hadar,  and  concludes 
the  description  with,  “ In  those  days  the  Tribute  of  Tyre,  and 
Zidon,  and  of  Jehu,  son  of  Omri,  I received.”  The  difficulty 
about  this  campaign  is,  the  eighteenth  year  of  Shalmaneser 
concurred  with  the  first  year  of  Jehoram,  of  Israel,  ten  years 
earlier  than  the  first  of  Jehu.  Some  have  doubted  that  the 
Jehu,  son  of  Omri,  of  the  inscription,  was  the  same  as  the  bib- 


* “ Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  106. 
f Ibid.  | Ibid.,  p.  114. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  203 


lical  Jehu,  son  of  Nimshi.  But  they  may  have  been  the  same 
person.  The  expression,  “ In  those  days  the  Tribute  of  Tyre, 
and  Zidon,  and  of  Jehu,  son  of  Omri,  I received,”  points  to  the  fact 
that  the  inscription  was  written  some  time  after  the  event  of  the 
war  with  Ilazael,  and  the  tribute  spoken  of  belongs  to  a period 
of  years  during  which  it  was  paid  by  the  house  of  Omri,  and 
may  extend  into  the  reign  of  Jehu.  It  is  only  necessary  that 
the  time  when  the  inscription  was  made  should  be  placed  after  the 
beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehu.  The  scribe  who  prepares  the 
insci'iption  is  acquainted  with  the  fact  that  Jehu  is  on  the 
throne  of  Israel,  and  also  with  the  circumstances  connecting 
the  house  of  Omri  with  payment  of  tribute,  and  he  joins  the 
two  in  the  inscription.  Again,  it  may  be  doubted  that  Jehu, 
the  son  of  Nimshi,  ever  paid  any  tribute  to  Shalmaneser;  at 
least,  if  the  scribe  was  no  better  acquainted  with  Jewish  his- 
tory than  the  one  who  prepared  the  inscription  of  Sennacherib’s 
third  campaign,  where  Menahem,  of  Samaria,  is  mentioned  as 
paying  tribute  to  Sennacherib.  Instead  of  accusing  Senna- 
cherib of  being  the  most  mendacious  of  all  the  Ass}7rian  kings, 
an  excuso  of  ignorance  might  be  tolerated  for  this  kind  of  mis- 
take. Further,  the  tribute  of  Menahem  might  have  been 
assumed  to  be  the  customary  tribute ; the  amount  of  one 
thousand  talents  of  silver  exacted  from  Menahem  by  Tiglath 
Pileser  being  submitted  to  not  only  for  himself  but  his  suc- 
cessors upon  the  throne,  and  known  under  the  descriptive  title 
of  “ Tribute  of  Menahem  of  Samaria.”  The  difference  between 
the  two  names  Jehoram  and  Jehu,  meaning  “exalted  of  Je- 
hovah” and  “Jehovah  is  he,”  may  be  nothing  more  than  the 
method  adopted  by  the  chronicler  to  distinguish  between  two 
successive  kings  of  the  same  kingdom  ; somewhat  similar  to  the 
practice  followed  in  the  case  of  Jehoiakim  and  Jehoiachin.  If 
it  is  assumed  that  the  Assyrians  were  ignorant  enough  to  suppose 
Jehu,  the  son  of  Nimshi,  to  be  the  son  of  Omri,  is  it  any  more 
of  an  assumption  to  suppose  they  were  not  so  ignorant,  but 
rendered  the  name  of  Jehoram  as  Jehu?  This  question  is 
affected  by  the  change  in  a name  so  common  when  translated 
or  rendered  by  another  tongue.  These  names  are  alike,  and  if 
there  is  any  real  distinction  between  them,  it  goes  in  with  the 
story  of  Jehu’s  mission  as  the  appointed  instrument  of  the  God 


204 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


of  Israel  to  punish  the  house  of  Omri ; but  the  question  is, 
Was  there  enough  difference  between  the  two  to  prevent  a 
common  rendering  in  a foreign  tongue?  The  eighteenth  of 
Shalmaneser  has  the  same  epoch  as  the  first  year  of  Jehoram. 
It  may  have  been  the  price  of  his  throne,  or  the  tribute  immedi- 
ately levied  upon  him  at  his  accession  by  the  king  of  Assyria, 
who  at  that  time  was  warring  in  Palestine  against  Hazael.  It 
meant  at  that  time  peace  and  safety,  things  most  desirable  to  a 
new  sovereign,  who  probably  did  not  feel  strong  enough  to 
resist  the  demand  at  that  time.  This  arrangement  of  the  chro- 
nology is  an  improvement  upon  that  required  by  the  usual  bib- 
lical chronology.  By  that  Ahab  reigned  from  b.c.  918  to  897, 
and  taking  b.c.  860,  Mr.  Smith’s  epoch  for  the  first  year  of 
Shalmaneser,  Ahab  had  ceased  to  reign  thirty-seven  years  before 
the  accession  of  Shalmaneser.  Professor  Oppert,  in  order  to 
bring  Shalmaneser  within  the  possibilities  of  the  inscriptions, 
supposes  there  was  a break  in  the  Assyrian  canon  at  the  year  in 
which  Tiglath  Pileser  ascends  the  throne,  and  inserts  forty-seven 
years,  thereby  raising  Shalmaneser’s  epochs  that  many  years.* 

TIGLATH  PILESER. 

Azariah,  king  of  Judah,  and  the  tribute  of  Menahem  of  Sa- 
maria are  mentioned  in  an  inscription!  of  Tiglath  Pileser. 
Probable  date,  according  to  Mr.  Smith,  b.c.  738;  this  reduced 
nineteen  years  is  b.c.  719,  in  which  year  fell  the  eighth  year  of 
Tiglath  Pileser.  b.c.  719  is  the  epoch  of  the  38-39  years  of 
Azariah  and  also  of  the  first  year  of  Menahem.  The  Bible  \ in 
the  case  of  Menahem  describes  exactly  the  condition  of  things 
I have  supposed  to  exist  at  the  accession  of  Jehoram  and  his 
payment  of  tribute  to  Shalmaneser.  “And  Pul,  king  of  As- 
syria, came  against  the  land:  and  Menahem  gave  Pul  a thou- 
sand talents  of  silver,  that  his  hand  might  be  with  him  to  con- 
firm the  kingdom  in  his  hand.”  Another  inscription  of  Tiglath 
Pileser  mentions  Rezin  of  Syria,  who  is  associated  in  the  Bible 
with  Pekah  in  a war  upon  Judah. § Another  mentions  Jehoahaz 


* “Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  pp.  5,  75.  f Ibid.,  p.  117. 
1 II.  Kings  xv.  19. 

I “Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  11G. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  205 


of  Judah.*  No  king  of  exactly  this  name  was  on  the  throne  of 
Judah  at  this  time.  By  the  chronology  of  this  book,  Azariah 
and  Jotham  were  the  kings  reigning  in  Judah  during  the  reign 
of  Tiglath  Pileser.  Ahaz,  who  succeeds  Jotham,  has  for  his 
name  the  last  portion  of  that  of  Jehoahaz,  and  Assyrian  schol- 
ars have  identified  Jehoahaz  as  Ahaz.  The  name  Yahu-Khazi, 
which  is  translated  Jehoahaz,  and  understood  to  mean  Ahaz, 
contains  as  its  first  element  Yahu  ; this  is  almost  identical,  if  the 
variation  is  of  any  account,  with  Yahua,  which  is  translated  Jehu 
in  the  inscription  of  Shalmaneser  II.  It  has  been  noticed  that 
the  Hebrew  chronicler  distinguishes  two  successive  kings  who 
bore  the  same  name  by  a change  which  affected  the  form  rather 
than  the  meaning  of  the  name.  Jehoahaz  means  “ Whom  Je- 
hovah holds  or  possesses,”  and  Ahaz  means  “ Possessor,”  and 
Jotham,  “Jehovah  is  upright.”  In  the  two  names,  Jotham  and 
Ahaz,  there  is  all  that  there  is  in  Jehoahaz,  and  they  may  he 
modified  forms  of  Jehoahaz,  and  purposely  so,  in  order  to  dis- 
tinguish the  two  kings,  one  from  the  other,  the  real  name  of 
each  being  Jehoahaz.  Another  inscription  of  Tiglath  Pileser 
has  the  following  reference  to  Pekah  and  Hoshea.  “ Pekah 
their  king  . . . and  Hoshea  to  the  kingdom  over  them  I ap- 
pointed . . . their  tribute  I received  and  ...  to  Assyria  I 
sent.”  f This  would,  at  first  sight,  seem  to  imply,  as  Hoshea 
began  to  reign  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  that  the  Jehoahaz 
of  the  inscription  was  the  Ahaz  of  the  Bible.  This  would  ex- 
tend the  bounds  of  the  reign  of  Tiglath  Pileser  beyond  those 
laid  down  in  the  Assyrian  canon.  To  bring  Hoshea  within 
the  limits,  and  to  uphold  the  Bible  statements  and  to  confirm 
the  inscription,  a different  construction  must  be  put  upon  the 
history  than  that  hitherto  given  to  it.  The  death  of  Tiglath 
Pileser  is  placed  by  the  Babylonian  chronicle  in  the  last  year  of 
his  reign  as  king  of  Babylon,  which  corresponds  to  that  of 
Poros  in  the  canon  of  Ptolemy,  b.c.  727,  which,  reduced  nine- 
teen years,  becomes  b.c.  708.  This  is  the  year,  according  to  the 
chronology  of  this  book,  in  which  Pekahiah  ceased  and  Pekah 
began  to  reign ; this  was  also  the  epoch  of  the  first  year  of 
Jotham.  It  is  not  clear  always  whether  Tiglath  Pileser  refers 


* “ Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  124.  f Ibid.,  pp.  123,  124. 

18 


206 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


toPekahiah  or  Pekah  in  ike  inscriptions,  or  whether  both  are 
mentioned.  Pekaha  is  the  Assyrian  form  for  the  names  of  these 
kings.  Pekahiah  succeeded  his  father  Menahem  upon  the 
throne  of  Israel,  and  after  a reign  of  over  one  year  he  was 
slain  by  Pekah,  a captain  of  his,  who  seized  the  throne.  In  the 
days  of  Pekah,  Tiglath  Pileser,  king  of  Assyria,  took  Ijon  and 
other  cities,  and  all  the  land  of  Naphtali,  and  carried  them  cap- 
tive to  Assyria.*  Hoshea,  the  son  of  Elah,  conspired  against 
Pekah  and  slew  him  in  the  twentieth  year  of  Jotham,  and 
reigned  in  his  stead. | Pekah  reigned  twenty  years.  This  state- 
ment of  the  death  of  Pekah  is  based  upon  the  twenty  years 
given  to  Pekah  in  the  Bible.  As  Jotham  began  to  reign  in  the 
second  year  of  Pekah,  his  twentieth  year  will  overlap  the  first 
year  of  his  successor,  Ahaz.  The  inference  without  a contrary 
statement  would  bo  that  Iloshca  obtained  the  throne  of  Israel 
at  this  time,  but  the  Bible  states  that  Iloshea  began  to  reign 
over  Israel  in  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  and  we  must  conclude 
that  between  the  first  and  twelfth  years  of  Ahaz  there  was  an 
interregnum  in  Israel.  During  this  interregnum  Hoshea  was 
probably  struggling  to  obtain  the  throne.  It  appears  that  from 
the  first  year  of  Pekah,  b.c.  708,  unto  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz, 
15. c.  683,  a period  of  twenty-five  years,  Hoshea  had  been  con- 
tending for  the  throne  of  Isi'ael.  Tiglath  Pileser,  in  the  extract 
given  of  the  much-mutilated  inscription,  mentions  Pekah  and 
the  appointment  of  Hoshea  to  the  throne.  Tiglath  Pileser  dies 
in  this  year.  Under  a temporary  reverse  of  fortune  Pekah 
loses  his  throne,  and  Hoshea  is  appointed  to  the  same  by  the 
king  of  Assyria.  The  account  leaves  us  in  ignorance  of  the 
history  of  Pekah  during  this  temporary  elevation  of  Hoshea. 
Of  Hoshea  we  learn  that  Shalmaneser,  the  successor  of  Tiglath 
Pileser,  came  against  him,  and  Hoshea  became  his  servant,  and 
gave  him  presents,  which  is  an  euphemism  for  the  payment  of 
tribute.  After  this  the  king  of  Assyria  detected  Hoshea  in  a 
conspiracy  with  So,  king  of  Egypt,  and  because  the  king  of 
Israel  brought  no  presents,  as  he  had  done  year  by  year,  he  put 
him  in  prison. J Shalmaneser  reigned  five  years  and  was  over- 


* II.  Kings  xv.  29. 

J Ibid.,  xvii.  3,  4,  5. 


f Ibid.,  xv.  30. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  207 


thrown  by  Sargon,  a general  of’  liis,  who  seized  the  throne  of 
Assyria.  Sargon  captured  Samaria  in  the  beginning  of  his 
reign.*  The  capture  of  Samaria,  the  usurpation  of  Sargon,  and 
the  imprisonment  of  Hoshea  are  events  which  possibly  lie  to- 
gether. The  overthrow  of  Iloshea,  at  this  time,  was  the  oppor- 
tunity for  Pekah  to  regain  his  throne.  The  Bible,  while  relating 
events  concerning  Hoshea  which  happened  before  the  twelfth 
year  of  Ahaz,  does  not  chronologically  recognize  his  reign  until 
that  time.  Sargon  begins  his  reign  in  b.c.  702,  and  in  this  year 
we  may  suppose  Pekah  regained  his  throne.  Hoshea  in  some 
way  obtains  his  liberty,  and  slays  Pekah  in  the  twentieth  year 
of  Jotham,  b.c.  G92.  From  this  point  down  to  the  twelfth  year 
of  Ahaz  was  an  interregnum.  What  the  political  condition  was 
at  this  time  may  be  learned  from  the  Book  of  Ilosea.f  “ When 
Ephraim  saw  his  sickness,  and  Judah  saw  his  wound,  then  went 
Ephraim  to  the  Assyrian,  and  sent  to  king  Jareb:  yet  could  he 
not  heal  you,  nor  cure  you  of  your  wound.”  Understanding 
this  to  refer  to  the  attacks  of  Israel  upon  Judah,  and  to  the 
civil  war  prevailing  in  Israel,  it  is  in  further  illustration  of  the 
history  at  this  time,  by  allusion  to  Sennacherib,  king  of  Assyria. 
The  Assyrian  name  of  Sennacherib  was  Sin-ahi-iriba.  This  is 
abbreviated,  and  only  the  last  element,  Iriba,  is  retained,  which 
is  rendered  in  Hosea  as  Iareb.  By  the  help  of  the  Assyrians, 
Hoshea  is  at  last  established  upon  the  throne  of  Israel  in  the 
twelfth  year  of  Ahaz.  But  this  brought  no  cure  to  the  wound 
of  Ephraim.  The  taint  of  disloyalty  and  faithlessness  was 
greater  than  the  physician’s  art  of  healing. 

It  is  not  known  how  many  sieges  Samaria  suffered  during 
this  period.  The  effect  of  the  Assyrian  arms  in  the  conquest  of 
Palestine  was  not  permanent  towards  submissiveness.  Expedi- 
tion follows  expedition,  and  conquests  have  to  be  made  over  and 
over  again.  The  deportation  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  land 
may  have  served  a double  purpose,  the  not  least  one  being  the 
removal  of  an  incorrigibly  rebellious  people. 

The  fall  of  Samaria,  connected  with  the  last  year  of  Hoshea, 
is  placed  in  this  work  in  b.c.  675. 


* “ Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  215. 
f Hosea  v.  13. 


208 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


SENNACHERIB  AND  HEZEKIAH. 

The  history  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  is  found  in  separate 
paragraphs,  the  natural  result  of  summing  up  in  a page  or  two 
the  principal  facts  of  a long  and  eventful  reign.  On  this  ac- 
count their  natural  continuity  is  destroyed.  Between  some  of 
these  there  is  no  connection  other  than  that  they  are  placed  in 
juxtaposition  in  the  story.  The  inference  is  the  events  so  hap- 
pened, for  it  is  customary  to  relate  such  in  their  due  order  of 
time.  The  account  reads  as  if  there  was  but  one  expedition 
made  by  Sennacherib  against  Hezekiah,  but  unless  the  king  of 
Assyria  made  two  different  attacks  upon  Hezekiah  the  story  is 
inconsistent  in  one  important  detail.  In  II.  Kings  xviii.  we  are 
told  Sennacherib  invaded  Judah  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hez- 
ekiah, and  the  king  of  Judah  made  submission  and  handed  over 
to  the  Assyrian  king  all  the  treasures  of  his  house,  and  the 
Lord’s  house,  even  to  the  stripping  from  the  doors  and  pillars  of 
the  temple  the  gold  with  which  they  were  overlaid.  This  is 
next  followed  by  the  account  of  the  messengers  from  the  king 
of  Assyria,  their  outrageous  and  insulting  language,  and  their 
efforts  to  intimidate  the  people.  Hezekiah  resorts  to  prayer  and 
the  intercession  of  Isaiah  to  save  him  and  the  city.  Nothing 
is  said  of  Sennacherib’s  broken  faith  in  renewing  his  demands 
after  he  had  received  the  entire  contents  of  the  royal  and  tem- 
ple treasuries.  This  is  followed  by  the  miraculous  destruction 
of  Sennacherib’s  army.  Then  comes  the  sickness  of  Hezekiah. 
This  is  connected  with  the  attack  of  Sennacherib,  because  Isaiah, 
when  he  cures  Hezekiah,  assures  him  of  the  safety  of  the  city 
from  the  attack  of  Sennacherib  and  promises  him  he  shall  live 
fifteen  years  more.  These  fifteen,  counting  both  extremes,  fol- 
low the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah ; they  with  the  fourteen 
make  up  the  twenty-nine  years  Hezekiah  reigned.  Following 
this  comes  the  account  of  the  letters  and  presents  from  Bero- 
dach-baladan,  son  of  Baladan,  king  of  Babylon,  which  were 
sent,  we  are  told,  “ for  he  had  heard  that  Hezekiah  had  been 
sick.”  Hezekiah  displays  before  the  ambassadors  from  Babylon 
“ the  house  of  his  precious  things,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,”  etc. 
The  inconsistency  here  is,  if  Hezekiah  had  given  to  Sennacherib 
all  his  treasure  in  his  fourteenth  year,  there  was  nothing  left 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  209 


worthy  of  the  name,  or  for  a vainglorious  display  to  excite  the 
wondering  admiration  of  the  strangers  from  afar,  or  to  give  oc- 
casion for  Isaiah  to  utter  the  prophecy  of  the  evil  results  to 
flow  therefrom.  There  is  no  doubt  of  the  fact  by  itself,  but 
taken  as  related  and  in  its  juxtaposition  it  was  impossible.  The 
account  in  II.  Chronicles,  although  in  most  particulars  like  that 
in  II.  Kings,  differs  from  it  in  the  omission  of  all  account  of  the 
tribute,  and  in  the  spirit  which  is  made  to  actuate  Hezekiah. 
In  IT.  Kings  he  is  timid,  in  II.  Chronicles  he  is  courageous ; in 
11.  Kings  he  submits  and  pays  the  tribute,  in  11.  Chronicles  he 
sets  about  fortifying  the  city  and  encourages  the  people.  The 
account  of  the  messengers  from  Babylon  is  different.  They  are 
not  sent  by  Berodaeh-baladan,  but  by  the  princes  of  Babylon, 
and  no  mention  of  Hezekiah’s  sickness  is  made  in  that  connec- 
tion ; it  is  said  they  came  to  inquire  of  the  wonder  done  in  the 
land. 

If  Sennacherib  made  two  expeditions  into  Judea,  which  is 
the  view  held  by  critics  and  Biblical  scholars,  these  inconsisten- 
cies, so  far  as  they  are  material,  are  removed,  and  those  which 
are  immaterial,  arising  as  they  do  from  a misapprehension  of 
the  sequence  of  the  events,  are  to  be  explained  in  that  way. 
The  inscription  of  Sennacherib,  which  gives  an  account  of  his 
third  and  fourth  campaigns,  confirms  the  matter  of  the  tribute. 
Sennacherib  declares  “He  himself  (Hezekiah),  like  a bird  in  a 
cage,  inside  Jerusalem,  his  royal  citjq  I shut  him  up  : siege-tow- 
ers against  him  I constructed  (for  he  had  given  commands  to 
renew  the  bulwarks  of  the  great  gate  of  his  citj").”  . . . “ He 
himself,  Hezekiah,  the  fearful  splendour  of  my  majesty  had  over- 
whelmed him.  The  workmen,  soldiers,  and  builders,  whom  for 
the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem  his  royal  city  he  had  collected 
within  it,  now  carried  tribute,  and  with  thirty  talents  of  gold, 
eight  hundred  talents  of  silver”  . . . “after  me  he  sent;  and  to 
pay  tribute,  and  do  homage  he  sent  his  envoy.”*  This  from  the 
Assyrian  inscription  confirms  the  account  in  II.  Chronicles  as 
to  the  courage  with  which  Hezekiah  first  met  the  attack  of 
Sennacherib.  It  even  goes  to  confirm  a particular  detail  of  the 
new  fortifications  made  by  Hezekiah.  The  inscription  says,  “ for 


* “Assyrian  Canon”  (G.  Smith),  p.  135.  “ Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  i. 

18* 


210 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


he  had  given  commands  to  renew  the  bulwarks  of  the  great  gate 
of  his  city,”  and  in  II.  Chronicles  we  are  told  that  Hezekiah  built 
up  .the  broken-down  walls  and  raised  the  towers  higher.  The 
matter  of  the  tribute  related  in  II.  Kings  is  confirmed  to  the 
exact  amount  of  the  gold,  and  the  difference  in  the  silver  be- 
tween the  three  hundred  talents  of  II.  Kings  and  the  eight 
hundred  talents  of  the  inscription  may  be  explained,  until  more 
is  known  of  the  matter,  by  tbe  various  values  put  upon  the  de- 
nominations of  silver. 

The  account  in  II.  Kings,  which  is  connected  with  the  de- 
struction of  Sennacherib’s  army,  declares,  in  answer  to  Heze- 
kiah’s  prayer,  “the  king  of  Assyria,  He  shall  not  come  into  this 
city,  nor  shoot  an  arrow  there,  nor  come  before  it  with  shield, 
nor  cast  a bank  against  it.”*  This  is  repeated  word  for  word 
in  the  narrative  found  in  Isaiah.  If  this  is  understood  to  refer 
to  the  attack  upon  Jerusalem,  mentioned  by  Sennacherib  in  his 
inscription,  it  is  in  direct  conti'adiction  of  it,  for  that  as  quoted  re- 
lates that  Sennacherib  shut  up  Hezekiah  in  his  royal  city ; that  is, 
laid  siege  to  it,  and  siege-towers  were  constructed.  It  is  possible 
to  reform  tbe  history  so  as  to  allow  of  two  attacks  by  Senna- 
cherib upon  Hezekiah  from  its  own  internal  evidence.  The 
first  attack  was  that  connected  with  the  tribute.  The  second 
invasion  of  Judah  was  when  Sennacherib  sent  Tartan,  Kabsaris, 
and  Kab-shakeh  to  intimidate  him,  and  to  demand  pledges  and 
more  tribute  money.  At  this  time  Sennacherib  did  not  come 
near  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  but  hearing  that  Tirhakah  had  come 
out  of  Egypt  against  him,  he  turns  his  attention  to  his  new 
enemy.  The  Egyptians  stated  to  Herodotus,  as  he  has  recorded 
in  his  history, f that  when  the  Assyrian  army  was  encamped 
opposite  their  own,  in  the  night  a multitude  of  field-mice  in- 
vaded the  Assyrian  camp  and  devoured  the  quivers  and  bow- 
strings and  tbe  thongs  of  the  shields  of  the  Assyrians,  and 
maybe  included  in  this  all  things  of  their  equipment  made  of 
leather.  The  Assyrian  army  in  this  predicament  was  practi- 
cally what  a modern  army  would  be  without  gunpowder. 
Such  an  invasion  of  rodents  was  nothing  extraordinary,  as 
those  who  have  made  themselves  familiar  with  the  habits  of 


* II.  Kings  xix.  32. 


f Book  II.  141. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  211 


these  animals  testify.  The  means  by  which  the  defeat  of 
Sennacherib  was  brought  about  were  those  known  as  natural  or 
second  causes ; but  the  deliverance  was  none  the  less  one  of 
those  usually  described  as  miraculous.  In  the  morning,  when 
the  Assyrians  discovered  the  condition  they  were  in,  they  took 
to  flight,  and  great  multitudes  of  them  were  slain.  In  II. 
Kings  the  manner  of  the  destruction  is  described:  “And  it 
came  to  pass  that  night,  that  the  angel  of  the  Lord  went  out, 
and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians  a hundred  fourscore 
and  five  thousand  : and  when  they  arose  early  in  the  morning, 
behold,  they  were  all  dead  corpses.”*  This  is  an  additional 
fact,  and  not  inconsistent  with  the  Egyptian  narrative.  Prom 
the  narrative  of  this  last  attack  upon  Judah  by  Sennacherib,  it 
is  learned  that  this  event  was  connected  with  a sabbatical  year. 

I am  aware  it  has  been  argued  that  the  words  spoken  by  Isaiah 
to  Hezekiah,  “And  this  shall  be  a sign  unto  thee,  Ye  shall  eat 
this  year  such  things  as  grow  of  themselves,  and  in  tho  second 
year  that  which  springeth  of  the  same;  and  in  the  third  year 
sow  ye,  and  reap,  and  plant  vineyards,  and  eat  tho  fruits 
thereof, ”f  could  not  mean  this  was  a regular  sabbatical  year,  or 
why  would  it  be  a sign  more  than  any  other  sabbatical  year? 
It  appears  the  sabbatical  years  instituted  by  Moses  were  not 
regularly  observed  by  the  Jews,  and  it  may  have  been  one  of 
the  reforms  of  Ilezekiah  to  have  them  observed.  The  words  of 
Isaiah  describe  something  more  than  a sabbatical  year.  Ac- 
cording to  the  command  of  Moses  they  were  to  refrain  from  all 
servile  work  during  the  sabbatical  year.  This  necessitated  the 
year  preceding  the  sabbatical  year  should  bear  fruit  for  three 
years ; that  is,  for  the  incomplete  part  of  itself  that  followed 
one  of  the  two  principal  harvests  of  the  year,  for  the  sabbatical 
year,  and  for  the  year  following  the  sabbatical,  until  they 
reaped  the  harvests  planted  in  that  year.  Isaiah  describes 
something  different.  There  were  to  be  two  successive  years 
having  all  the  characteristics  of  a sabbatical  year,  and  the 
former  year,  if  famine  is  to  be  avoided,  would  have  to  bear  fruit 
to  last  four  years,  unless  Ilezekiah  had  provided  in  advance 
storehouses  in  which  was  kept  the  overplus  produce  of  pre- 


* II.  Kings  xix.  35. 


f Ibid.,  xix.  29. 


2 12  JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 

vious  years.  This  is  what  Hezekiah  is  said  to  have  done.* 
If  Sennacherib  invaded  Judah  in  the  year  preceding  a sab- 
batical year,  of  necessity,  the  land  being  overrun  by  his  army, 
and  those  who  cultivate  the  soil  having  taken  refuge  in  the 
walled  cities,  the  year  would  be  a failure  in  an  agricultural 
sense.  The  following  year  being  sabbatical,  no  agricultural 
pursuits  would  be  followed.  This  describes  the  condition  of 
things  which  Isaiah  said  was  to  be  a sign.  Of  what  was  it  a 
sign?  Not  of  the  defeat  of  Sennacherib ; but  what  follows  in 
explanation  is  meant,  “And  the  remnant  that  is  escaped  of  the 
house  of  Judah  shall  yet  again  take  root  downward,  and  bear 
fruit  upward.”  The  metaphor  is  borrowed  from  the  circum- 
stances attending  the  two  years  in  which  no  planting  of  the 
earth  was  to  be  done,  followed  by  one  in  which  a renewal  of  the 
processes  of  agriculture  should  take  place.  It  is  well  known  that 
the  enemies  of  the  Jews  took  occasion  on  the  sabbath  to  gain 
certain  advantages,  which  a strict  observance  of  that  day  on 
the  part  of  the  Jews  permitted  them  to  take.  Josephusf  writes, 
that  although  the  Jews  were  allowed  to  defend  themselves 
when  attacked  on  the  sabbath  day,  yet  they  were  forbidden  to 
interfere  with  any  other  proceeding  of  the  enemy  which  did 
not  amount  to  a personal  collision.  He  writes,  this  was  discov- 
ered by  the  soldiers  of  Pompey  in  their  attack  upon  the  fortifi- 
cations of  the  temple,  so  that  on  the  sabbath  day  they  refrained 
from  attacking  the  Jews,  but  used  the  time  in  preparing,  unmo- 
lested, the  engines  of  war,  and  placing  them  in  position  ready 
for  the  attack  on  the  next  day.  Thus  they  were  enabled  to 
prepare  the  means  by  which  the  walls  were  beaten  down  and 
the  citadel  taken.  Similar  facts  are  related  of  the  capture  of 
Jerusalem  by  Ptolemy  J and  Herod.  § The  prohibition  applies 
with  the  same  force  to  the  sabbatical  year,  and  all  days  in 
which  servile  work  was  forbidden.  The  succession  of  sabbatical 
years,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose,  was  reckoned  from  some  epoch. 
The  era  of  the  tabernacle  was  in  b.c.  1396,  and  reckoning  from 


* II.  Chron.  xxxi.  11. 

f “Antiquities  of  the  Jews”  (Josephus),  Book  XII.  vi.  2. 
J Ibid.,  Book  XIV.  iv.  2. 
g Ibid.,  xvi.  2. 


CONTACT  BETWEEN  ASSYRIAN  AND  JEWISH  HISTORY.  213 

this  down  to  b.c.  676  is  a period  of  seven  hundred  and  twenty 
years,  which  contains  one  hundred  and  twenty  sabbatical  weeks 
of  years,  each  of  six  years  of  twelve  months,  or  seven  mixed 
years  (one  of  twelve  months  and  six  of  ten  months).  These 
years  in  Hezekiah’s  reign  will  bo  those  of  his  seventh  year, 
b.c.  676-675;  his  fourteenth  year,  670-669;  his  twenty-first 
year,  664-663 ; his  twenty-eighth  year,  658-657.  The  epoch  of 
tho  first  year  of  Sennacherib  is  obtained  as  following  the  last 
year  of  Sargon,  determined  by  his  last  year  as  king  of  Babylon, 
Sargon  being  the  same  as  Arkeanus  in  Ptolemy’s  canon.  This 
is  Ptolemy’s  eftoch  of  the  first  year  of  the  first  interregnum 
reduced  nineteen  years. 

The  first  attack  may  be  placed  in  the  first  year  of  Ilezekiah. 
This  was  the  third  campaign  of  Sennacherib  described  in  the 
inscription,  when  he  shut  up  Hezekiah  in  Jerusalem  like  a bird 
in  a cage. 

Sennacherib  in  his  next  campaign,  which  is  a continuation  of 
that  into  Judea,*  sets  up  Assur-nardin-suma,  his  son,  as  king  in 
Babylon.  This  was  in  b.c.  680,  and  in  the  first  year  of  Heze- 
kiah. This  is  an  important  confirmation  of  the  chronology,  be- 
cause b.c.  680  is  the  epoch  of  Aparanadius,  who  is  Assur-nardin- 
suma,  in  the  canon  of  Ptolemy  when  it  is  reduced  nineteen 
years,  from  b.c.  699  to  680.  At  this  time  Hezekiah  paid  the 
tribute  to  Sennacherib.  The  messengers  from  the  king  of 
Babylon  may  have  visited  Hezekiah  just  before  the  attack  of 
Sennacherib,  when  it  would  be  possible  for  Hezekiah  to  show 
them  his  treasures.  But  this  need  not  be  insisted  upon : the 
interval  of  thirteen  years  between  the  first  attack  and  the 
second  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah  is  long  enough,  with 
a very  prosperous  reign,  to  accumulate  much  treasure.  Were  it 
not  for  the  statement  of  tho  Assyrian  inscription  of  the  eleva- 
tion to  the  throne  of  Babylon  of  Assur-nardin-suma  as  following 
the  attack  upon  Hezekiah,  the  first  attack  might  be  placed  in 
the  seventh  year  of  Hezekiah,  the  first  sabbatical  year  of  his 
reign.  This  might  be  the  case  if  there  is  liberty  to  suppose 
Assur-nardin-suma,  who  had  been  put  on  the  throne  of  Babylon 
in  b.c.  680,  was  in  the  seventh  year  of  Hezekiah  temporarily 


* “ Records  of  the  Past,”  vol.  i. 


214 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


without  a throne,  and  the  fourth  expedition  had  for  one  of  its 
ends  the  restoration  of  Assur-nardin-suma  to  the  throne  of 
Babylon.  This  is  so  far  borne  out  by  the  Babylonian  chronicle, 
which  informs  us  that  Assur-nardin-suma  was  in  his  sixth  year 
captured  by  Kallasu,  king  of  Elam,  and  carried  to  Elam.  The 
sixth  year  of  Assur-nardin-suma  falls  in  with  the  seventh  year 
of  Hezekiah,  b.c.  675.  The  supposition  that  Sennacherib  re- 
stored him  to  his  throne  by  the  campaign  of  the  following  year 
may  be  tenable,  for  the  king  of  Elam  placed  Nergel-Zusezib 
upon  the  throne  of  Babylon,  and  he  answers  to  Kegebelos  in 
Ptolemy’s  canon,  and  Sennacherib  mentions  this  prince  as 
Suzub  in  the  inscription  of  this  campaign  as  he  who  had  stirred 
up  the  revolt  in  Babylonia.  It  stands  in  with  this,  that  this 
was  only  a temporary  success  of  Sennacherib,  because  for  the 
next  four  years  the  Babylonians  have  on  the  throne  one  of  their 
own  princes,  Musezib-Merodach  (Babylonian  chronicle),  the 
Mesesimordakus  of  the  canon.  This  will  allow  Hezekiah  a 
sufficient  time  in  his  sixth  year  to  undertake  to  fortify  the  city. 
This  also  finds  Sennacherib  in  Palestine  at  this  time,  for  the 
foil  of  Samaria  was  in  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah.  The  visit 
of  the  messengers  from  the  king  or  princes  of  Babylon  was 
before  these  events.  Nevertheless  the  first  view  follows  more 
closely  the  biblical  account,  and  there  will  be  time  enough  to 
begin  the  fortifications,  and  to  have  some  of  them  finished,  be- 
fore Sennacherib  began  the  siege  in  the  first  year  of  Hezekiah. 

The  second  attack  was  in  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  years 
of  Hezekiah  and  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  years  of  Sen- 
nacherib. The  Assyrian  king  enters  Judea  in  the  year  preceding 
a sabbatical  year.  Hezekiah  is  prevented  by  this  circumstance 
from  making  a proper  defence.  Now,  if  ever,  is  to  be  tested  the 
wisdom  of  the  law  against  offensive  warfare  in  the  sabbatical 
year.  Those  who  deny  the  miraculous  in  the  Bible  admit  the 
historical  facts,  and  claim  the  miracle  is  superimposed  upon 
them.  In  the  case  of  Hezekiah  at  this  time  the  very  facts 
themselves  demand  a miracle.  Jerusalem  is  saved  and  the 
army  of  Sennacherib  destroyed  by  the  angel  of  the  Lord.  In 
the  following  year  Hezekiah  is  sick  and  near  to  die.  This  is 
also  the  year  of  the  eclipse  of  b.o.  669.  After  this  messengers 
come  from  the  princes  of  Babylon  to  inquire  of  the  wonder 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA.  215 


done  in  the  land.  Hezekiah  shows  them  his  riches,  and  the 
story  of  them  is  carried  back  to  Babylon,  and  is  not  forgotten. 
The  prophetic  words  of  Isaiah  are  to  be  fulfilled  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. Some  have  supposed  the  death  of  Sennacherib  followed 
closely  upon  the  destruction  of  his  army  in  the  thirteenth-four- 
teenth year  of  Hezekiah.  The  Bible  states  that  he  went  and 
dwelt  in  Nineveh,  where  ho  was  slain  by  two  of  his  sons.*  The 
Assyrian  canon  mentions  no  expeditions  of  Sennacherib  in  his 
later  years,  and  the  inference  of  his  death  earlier  than  required 
by  the  canon  is  simply  gratuitous. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

JEWISH  HISTORY  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  HISTORIES  OP  BABY- 
LON AND  PERSIA. 

Josiaii,  king  of  Judah,  died  after  a reign  of  thirty-one  years. 
His  death  was  caused  by  a wound  received  in  the  battle  of  Me- 
giddo,  fought  with  Necho,  king  of  Egypt,  who  was  at  that  time 
engaged  in  a campaign  against  Charchcmish,  by  the  river  Eu- 
phrates. 

Jehoahaz  succeeded  his  father,  Josiah,  and  reigned  three 
months.  Necho,  after  the  capture  of  Charchcmish,  marched  to 
Jerusalem,  deposed  Jehoahaz,  and  elevated  Jehoiakim  to  the 
throne,  who  reigned  eleven  years. 

About  the  time  of  the  accession  of  Jehoiakim,  Nebuchadnez- 
zar, king  of  Babjlon,  commanded  an  expedition  to  recover 
Charchemish  and  the  provinces  of  Syria  and  Palestine.  Ac- 
cording to  Berosus,  Nabopolassar  sent  his  son  Nebuchadnezzar 
against  Necho.  Nebuchadnezzar  is  called  king  of  Babylon  be- 
fore tbe  death  of  his  father,  who,  in  II.  Kings  xxiii.  29,  is 
styled  the  king  of  Assyria.  The  giving  Nebuchadnezzar  the 
title  king  of  Babylon  before  the  death  of  his  father  has  been  ex- 
plained to  be  “a prolepsis  common  to  most  writers  of  history.”  j- 


* II.  Kings  xix.  7,  37. 

f “Historical  Illustrations  of  the  Old  Testament”  (Rawlinson),  p.  169. 


216 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


But  it  would  not  be  out  of  the  ordinary  if  the  two  titles,  king 
of  Assyria  and  king  of  Babylon,*  were  still  fashionable,  and  the 
lesser  one,  king  of  Babylon,  bestowed  on  Nebuchadnezzar,  the 
heir  of  the  throne.  It  is  probable,  as  the  Bible  declares  the  ex- 
pedition of  Necho  against  Charchemish  to  be  against  the  king 
of  Assyria,  f the  empire  was  still  called  Assyrian.  During  the 
subsequent  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  Babylon  grew  in  power 
and  surpassed  the  glories  of  Assyria,  which  were  now  beginning 
to  be  forgotten  in  the  splendor  of  the  new  kingdom.  We  hear 
no  more  of  the  king  of  Assyria;  it  is  now  Nebuchadnezzar, 
king  of  Babylon,  the  great  king. 

The  following  historical  statements  are  connected  with  the 
reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  Bible: 

The  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim.  J 
The  first  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  was  the  fourth  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim. § 

Nebuchadnezzar  carried  captives  from  Jerusalem  in  his 
seventh,  eighteenth,  and  twenty -third  years. || 

The  temple  at  Jerusalem  was  destroyed  in  the  nineteenth 
year  of  Nebuchadnezzar.^ 

The  thirty-seventh  year  of  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin  was 
the  first  year  of  Evil  Merodach. * * §  ** 

All  these  statements  are  carried  out  in  the  chronological 
table  except  that  of  the  captivity  of  the  seventh  year  of  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, which  is  omitted,  and  one  of  the  third  year  of  Je- 
hoiakim is  inserted  in  its  place. 

The  years  of  Nebuchadnezzar’s  sole  reign  are  reckoned  in 
years  of  ten  months  from  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  which 
causes  a thirty-seventh  year  to  fall  in  with  the  first  year  of  Evil 
Merodach,  and  if  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin  began  from  tbe 
siege  of  Jerusalem  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  ff  the  thirty- 
seventh  year  thereof,  by  the  year  of  ten  months,  will  concur 
with  the  first  year  of  Evil  Merodach.  This  is  not  the  usual 
explanation  of  this  statement  in  the  Bible.  Daniel,  in  the  be- 


*“  The  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East”  (Sayce),  pp.  134,  139. 

f II.  Kings  xxiii.  29.  X Daniel  i.  1. 

§ Jeremiah  xxv.  1.  ||  Ibid.,  lii.  28,  29,  30. 

f Ibid.,  lii.  12.  **  Ibid.,  lii.  31.  ff  Daniel  i.  1. 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA.  217 


ginning  of  the  book  bearing  bis  name,  states  that  “the  king 
spake  unto  Ashpenaz  the  master  of  bis  eunuchs,  that  be  should 
bring  certain  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  of  the  king’s  seed, 
and  of  the  princes.”  The  presence  in  Babylon  of  Jehoiachin, 
the  son  of  Jehoiakim,  is  predicated  upon  this  statement.  Je- 
hoiachin is  not  mentioned  in  this  connection,  but  his  presence  in 
Babylon  at  this  time  as  a hostage  for  the  fealty  of  Jehoiakim, 
his  father,  and  also  to  be  brought  up  under  Chaldean  influence 
and  moulded  to  the  will  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  a matter  of  such 
plain  policy  and  common  practice  that  it  requires  no  apology. 
When  Nebuchadnezzar  is  forced  to  remove  Jehoiakim  from  the 
throne  he  elevates  Jehoiachin  in  his  father’s  place,  but  becom- 
ing dissatisfied,  he  removes  Jehoiachin  after  a reign  of  three 
months,  and  places  his  uncle,  Zedekiah,  upon  the  throne.  This 
second  captivity  of  Jehoiachin,  if  we  may  be  allowed  to  dis- 
tinguish between  the  two  only  separated  by  a few  months,  is 
the  one  usually  followed,  and  it  is  the  one  during  which  he  suf- 
fered the  rigors  of  imprisonment.  This  allows  of  two  reckon- 
ings of  the  captivity,  one  of  the  first  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar’s 
sole  reign  and  the  other  of  the  eighth  year.  For  reasons  con- 
nected with  the  chronological  scheme  as  a whole,  the  captivity 
of  Jehoiachin  in  connection  with  the  first  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar’s sole  reign  is  followed. 

The  statements  of  Josephus,  though  believed  to  be  full  of  er- 
rors, suggest  what  appears  to  be  the  correct  chronology  down  to 
the  proclamation  of  Cyrus.  In  “ Antiquities  of  the  Jews”  he 
writes,  “In  the  fii’st  year  of  Cyrus,  which  was  the  seventieth 
from  the  day  that  our  people  were  removed  out  of  their  own 
land  into  Babylon.”  * In  his  dissertation  against  Apion  occurs : 
“These  accounts  agree  with  true  history  in  our  books:  for  in 
them  it  is  written  that  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  nineteenth  year 
of  his  reign  laid  our  temple  desolate,  and  so  it  lay  in  that  state 
of  obscurity  for  fifty  years;  but  that  in  the  second  year  of  Cy- 
rus its  foundations  were  laid,  and  it  wras  finished  again  in  the 
second  year  of  Darius.” f At  another  place  in  the  same  he 
states,  “ When  it  so  happened  that  our  city  was  desolate  during 


* “ Antiquities  of  the  Jews”  (Josephus),  Book  XI.  i.  1. 
j-  “ Against  Apion”  (Josephus),  Book  I.  21. 

19 


218 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


the  interval  of  seventy  years  until  the  days  of  Cyrus,  king  of 
Persia.”*  Ptolemy’s  canon  gives  forty-nine  years  from  the  de- 
struction of  the  temple  in  the  nineteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar to  the  second  year  of  Cyrus.  Josephus  counts  both  extremes 
and  calls  the  interval  fifty  years.  To  complete  the  period  of 
seventy  years  ho  first  mentions,  he  must  count  it  from  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  and  beginning  Nebu- 
chadnezzar’s first  year  with  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  he  ob- 
tains 1 4-  19  -f-  50  for  the  seventy  years  from  the  day  his  people 
were  removed  out  of  their  land  unto  the  first  year  of  Cyrus. 
The  number  19  should  be  18,  and  the  seventy  years  counted  to 
the  second  year  of  Cyrus,  as  in  the  second  quotation.  In  the 
third  quotation  from  Josephus  his  words  are,  “ Our  city  was  des- 
olate during  the  interval  of  seventy  years,  until  the  days  of 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia.”  If  this  period  is  the  same  as  the  first 
quotation’s,  it  is  strange  he  uses  language  which  applies  more 
truthfully  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  which  he  states  was 
only  fifty  years  before  the  second  of  Cyrus.  Josephus’s  chro- 
nology  of  this  period  differs  from  the  canon  of  Ptolemy.  He 
gives  Nebuchadnezzar  forty-three  years  ; Evil  Merodach,  eigh- 
teen years ; Neglessar,  forty  years ; Labosordacus,  nine  months ; 
Baltasar,  called  Naboandelus,  seventeen  years.  Against  this 
latter,  he  says,  came  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  and  Darius,  the  Mede.f 
Counting  from  the  first  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  the  end  of  Bal- 
tasar are  one  hundred  and  eighteen  plus  years.  I have  emended 
the  canon  of  Ptolemy  in  a way  which  brings  the  first  of  Neb- 
uchadnezzar to  b.c.  595.  His  sole  reign  begins  in  b.c.  583,  in  part 
current  with  his  thirteenth  year  of  twelve  months,  reckoned 
from  b.c.  595.  If  the  figures  furnished  by  Josephus  are  from 
the  time  Nebuchadnezzar  became  king  of  Babylon,  then  twelve 
years  ai’e  to  be  deducted  from  ono  hundred  and  eighteen  to  get 
the  term  from  the  fourth  of  Jehoiakim  or  Nebuchadnezzar’s  sole 
reign  ; this  will  leave  one  hundred  and  six  years,  and  this,  less 
seventy  years  for  the  captivity,  leaves  a remainder  of  thirty-six 
years,  nine  months,  which  is  the  term  of  Darius  Hystaspes’s 
reign.  With  this  view  Josephus  places  the  capture  of  Babylon 


* “ Against  Apion”  (Josephus),  Book  I.  19. 
f “ Antiquities  of  the  Jews”  (Josephus),  Book  X.  xi.  2. 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA.  219 


and  the  death  of  Baltasar  at  the  end  of  Darius  Hystaspes’s  reign, 
and  the  end  of  the  seventy  years’  captivity  at  the  beginning  of 
Darius’s  reign.  The  account  of  the  death  of  Baltasar  (Belshaz- 
zar) closes  Book  X.  of  the  “ Antiquities  of  the  Jews.”  The  next 
book,  the  eleventh,  opens  with  an  account  of  the  proclamation 
of  Cyrus,  similar  to  that  in  the  Book  of  Ezra,  for  the  return  of 
the  Jews  to  Jerusalem  and  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple.  Men- 
tion is  made  in  this  proclamation  of  the  restoration  of  the  ves- 
sels of  the  Lord  removed  by  Nebuchadnezzar  from  the  temple, 
and  which  had  been  brought  to  Belshazzar  during  his  revels  on 
the  night  the  city  was  taken.  The  successor  of  Darius  Hystas- 
pes  was  Xerxes,  therefore  Xerxes  was  the  Cyrus  who  made  the 
proclamation.  This  is  a conclusion  not  intended  by  Josephus, 
but  one  compelled  by  his  figures,  one  object  of  which  was  prob- 
ably to  account  for  the  age  of  Darius  Hystaspcs  at  the  capture  of 
Babylon,  which  is  said  to  have  been  sixty-two  years.*  Herod- 
otus mentions  in  connection  with  a narrative  of  a dream  of 
Cyrus  concerning  Darius,  that  the  latter  was  twenty  years  old 
and  too  young  to  go  to  war.f  This  time  is  placed  by  the  death 
of  Cyrus  as  falling  in  his  last  year.  By  the  canon,  Cambyses 
reigns  eight  years  and  Darius  Hystaspes  thirty-six  years,  conse- 
quently Darius  Hystaspes  was  20  + 8 -{-  36  years  old  at  the  time 
of  his  death,  or  sixty-four  years  old.  This  places  the  death  of 
Baltasar  in  the  thirty-fourth  year  of  Darius,  when  he  was  sixt}r- 
two  years  old.  This  again  suggests  Xerxes  as  the  Cyrus  who 
issued  the  proclamation. 

In  the  explanation  of  the  cycles  of  eclipses,  which  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Persian  portion  of  the  canon  as  amended,  a cycle,  of 
which  Xerxes  is  supposed  to  be  the  eponym,  is  begun  with  the 
thirty-first  year  of  Darius,  and  for  six  years  it  overlaps  the 
reign  of  Darius,  and  covers  the  eight  years’  sole  reign  of  Xerxes 
and  extends  for  five  years  into  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes.  This 
accounts  for  the  association  of  Cyrus,  the  Persian  (Xerxes), 
with  Darius  Hystaspes  in  the  capture  of  the  city.  If  this 
person  had  been  Cyrus  the  Great,  he  would  not  have  been  a 
subordinate  of  Darius,  as  the  narrative  implies.  We  must 
explain  Josephus’s  account,  as  well  as  that  of  the  Bible,  by  giving 


* Daniel  v.  31. 


f Herodotus,  Book  I.  209. 


220 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


to  the  name  of  Cyrus  a more  general  application.  This  name 
was  that  of  the  founder  of  the  Persian  monarchy,  and  it  was 
also  bestowed  upon  Xerxes.  The  name  Xerxes  is  said  to  mean 
king,  and  the  name  Cyrus  may  bear  a similar  meaning  and  one 
in  origin  like  that  of  Pharaoh,  “the  great  house.”*  Although 
Cyrus,  the  founder *of  the  Persian  monarchy,  was  a real  person, 
many  of  the  stories  about  him  are  of  a legendary  character. 
A comparison  between  the  legend  of  Perseus,  whose  son  Perses 
was  the  patronymic  of  the  Persians,  might  lead  to  the  impres- 
sion that  a name  for  Cyrus  was  Perseus  ( per  — aa  — curia).  In 
this  legend  the  circumstances  attending  the  birth  and  infancy  of 
Perseus  are  so  like  those  told  of  Cyrus  that  the  coincidence 
cannot  escape  attention.  When  to  this  is  added  the  similarity 
of  the  names  of  the  personages  connected  with  the  two  stories, 
but  one  conclusion  is  reached,  that  under  the  guise  of  the 
legend  of  Pei’seus  the  Greeks  preserved  some  of  the  incidents 
of  the  life  of  Cyrus.  Perseus,  when  he  reaches  man’s  estate,  is 
sent  by  Polydectes,  his  preserver,  who  now  wishes  to  be  rid  of 
him,  to  slay  the  gorgon  Medusa.  On  his  return  from  that  expe- 
dition, he  rescues  Andromeda  from  a sea-monster,  by  whom  he 
became  the  father  of  Perses.  From  the  dead  body  of  Medusa 
sprang  the  winged  horse  Pegasus,  from  the  imprint  of  whose 
hoofs  welled  up  the  springs  of  Helicon.  Perseus  finally  returns 
with  his  mother  to  Argos.  His  grandfather,  Acrisius,  flies  to 
Larissa.  Thither  Perseus  follows  to  persuade  the  king  to  return 
home,  and  while  there  accidentally  killed  him  with  a discus 
during  the  progress  of  certain  games  celebrated  in  honor  of 
Acrisius  by  the  king  of  that  country.  Comparing  these  names 
with  those  found  in  the  story  of  Cyrus  we  have — 


Astyages. 

Acrisius. 

Mandane. 

Danae. 

Cyrus. 

Perseus. 

Medes. 

Medusa,  Andromeda. 

Persians. 

Perses. 

Harpagus. 

Pegasus. 

But  the  most  noticeable  verification  of  the  connection  between 


* “ Dictionnaire  d’ Archeologie  Egyptienne”  (Pierret),  Pharaon. 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA. 


221 


the  two  stories  is  the  total  solar  eclipse  at  Larissa,  where 
Acrisius  was  slain  with  a discus  by  Perseus.  This  eclipse  is 
placed  by  Xenophon  about  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  the 
Modes  by  the  Persians. 

Two  conclusions  may  be  drawn  from  the  circumstances  found 
in  Josephus  and  Herodotus.  First,  in  Josephus,  two  distinct 
and  opposing  chronologies  are  found,  one  of  which  is  similar  to 
that  found  in  the  canon  of  Ptolemy,  and  tho  other  confirms  the 
reformation  of  the  canon,  as  proposed  in  this  work,  in  so  far  as 
Nebuchadnezzar’s  forty-three  years  should  begin  at  an  epoch 
twelve  years  before  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim.  Second,  the 
namo  Cyrus  was  one  also  applied  to  Xerxes. 

The  Book  of  Ezra  opens  with  the  proclamation  of  Cyrus.  It 
is  proposed  to  show  from  the  list  of  Persian  kings  therein  found 
that  by  Cyrus  was  meant  Xerxes.  The  order  of  these  kings,  as 
gathered  from  this  book,  is  Cyrus,*  Ahasuerus,f  Artaxerxes,  J 
Darius,  § Artaxerxes.  ||  There  are  two  ways  of  comparing  this 
list  of  Persian  kings  with  that  portion  of  Ptolemy’s  canon  in 
which  they  are  found:  one,  to  begin  by  comparing  Cyrus  of 
tho  Book  of  Ezra  with  the  Cyrus  of  the  canon ; the  other,  to 
begin  by  comparing  the  last  of  the  four  kings  of  Ezra  with  a 
corresponding  king  in  the  canon  and  to  let  Cyrus  fall  where  ho 
may.  By  the  first  plan  it  is  necessary  to  insert  the  Magian 
impostor  under  the  name  of  Smerdis  or  Bardis,^[  who  only 
reigned  a few  months,  and  whose  time  is  included  in  the  canon 
in  the  reigns  of  Cambyses  and  Darius  Hystaspes.  The  list  from 
the  canon,  amended  by  the  insertion  of  Smerdis  and  compared 
with  the  kings  in  Ezra,  is  as  follows: 


Canon. 

Cyrus. 

Cambyses. 

(Smerdis.) 

Darius  Hystaspes. 

Xerxes. 

Artaxerxes. 


Ezra. 

Cyrus. 

Ahasuerus. 

Artaxerxes. 

Darius. 

Artaxerxes. 


* Ezra  iv.  5.  f Ibid.,  iv.  6.  J Ibid.,  iv.  7. 

g Ibid.,  iv.  5;  vi.  15.  ||  Ibid.,  vii.  1. 

f “ Historical  Illustrations  of  the  Old  Testament”  (ltawlinson),  pp.  192, 
193. 


222 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


This  identification  requires  the  hypothesis  that  Cambyses  was 
called  Ahasuerus  (that  is,  Xerxes)  and  Smerdis  Artaxerxes, 
while  no  explanation  is  known  for  the  omission  of  Xerxes  in 
his  proper  place.  To  favor  this  arrangement  there  is  no  other 
argument  than  that  it  is  done  to  make  the  Cyrus  of  Ezra  to  be 
the  same  as  the  Cyrus  of  the  canon.  On  the  other  hand,  notice 
how  perfectly  the  last  four  kings  agree  with  four  from  the  canon  : 


Canon. 

Darius  Hystaspes. 
Xerxes. 

Artaxerxes. 

Darius  Nothus. 
Artaxerxes  Mnemon. 


Ezra. 

Cyrus  ( Xerxes). 
Ahasuerus  (Xerxes). 
Artaxerxes. 

Darius. 

Artaxerxes. 


Cyrus  is  brought  on  a line  with  Darius  Ifystaspes,  but  this  is 
duo  to  a wrong  apprehension  of  Ezra.  In  the  fourth  chapter 
of  Ezra  it  is  said  counsellors  were  hired  to  frustrate  the  pur- 
pose of  the  Jews  in  the  rebuilding  of  their  city  and  temple  “ all 
the  days  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  even  until  the  reign  of 
Darius,  king  of  Persia.  And  in  the  reign  of  Ahasuerus,  in  the 
beginning  of  his  reign.”  . . . “And  in  the  days  of  Artaxerxes.” 
If  it  is  understood  that  the  circumstances  first  mentioned  referred 
to  the  whole  time  delays  were  thrown  in  the  way  of  the  Jews, 
then  from  the  first  year  of  Cyrus  (Xerxes)  covers  the  reigns  of 
Ahasuerus  (Xerxes)  and  Artaxerxes  (Longimanus),  the  Darius 
mentioned  being  Darius  Nothus,  the  successor  of  Longimanus, 
and  not  Darius  Hystaspes.  The  historian,  after  mentioning  the 
time  of  the  whole  duration  of  the  persecution  as  beginning  with 
the  reign  of  Cyrus  (Xerxes)  and  terminating  with  that  of 
Darius,  begins  a more  detailed  account.  Of  these  events  he 
was  not  a personal  witness,  but  derives  his  knowledge  from  the 
Jews  who  had  gone  before  him  to  Jerusalem.  Xerxes  was 
called  by  them  Ahasuerus,  and  according  to  the  view  now  set 
forth  he  was  known  to  the  Persians  under  the  name  of  Cyrus. 
This  king  is  mentioned  first  after  the  general  description  of  the 
persecution,  his  part  in  it  is  the  first  detail,  and  his  place  is  the 
same  as  that  of  Cyrus  (Xerxes).  The  last  sentence  of  the 
fourth  chapter  of  Ezra  tells  us  the  work  ceased  unto  the  second 
year  of  Darius,  king  of  Persia,  and  in  the  sixth  chapter  we  are 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA.  223 


informed  the  house  was  finished  in  the  sixth  year  of  this  king. 
Ezra  goes  to  Jerusalem  in  the  seventh  year  of  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes,  who  was  the  Persian  king  who  was  called  Mnemon  ; 
this  was  in  the  year  b.c.  399.  In  the  twentieth  year  of  this 
same  king,  b.c.  386,  Nehemiah  obtains  permission  to  go  to 
Jerusalem  to  rebuild  the  city.  A period  of  four  hundred  and 
twenty  years  from  this  time  will  end  a.l>.  33.  The  list  of  high- 
priests  agrees  perfectly  with  this  arrangement.  Jeshua  holds 
this  office  at  the  time  of  the  proclamation  of  Cyrus  (Xerxes). 
The  three  mentioned  in  this  portion  of  the  history  are  Jeshua,  Joa- 
kim,  and  Eliashib.  The  notice  of  Joakim  is  confined  to  his  name 
simply,  but  Eliashib  was  high-priest  in  the  twentieth  year  of 
Artaxerxes.  This  will  come  about  whether  wo  give  to  their  terms 
of  office  the  number  of  years  usually  found  in  chronologies  or 
average  them  at  thirty  or  thirty-three  and  one-third  years  each. 

In  the  chronological  table  I have  given  the  years  of  only  three 
of  the  terms  of  captivity,  reckoning  seventy  years  to  each.  This 
is  necessary  in  order  to  identify  the  points  from  which  these 
terms  begin.  The  first  has  for  its  epoch  b.c.  583  ; it  begins  with 
the  captivity  of  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  when  Daniel  and 
certain  of  the  children  of  Israel  and  of  the  king’s  seed  were 
carried  to  Babylon.  The  second  begins  with  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  and  the  third  with  the  last  deportation  of  the 
Jews  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  twenty-third  year  of  his  reign. 
It  is  a question  which  of  these  terms  was  intended  to  be  the 
one  alluded  to  by  Jeremiah.  In  the  table  there  are  exactly 
twenty  years  between  the  seventieth  year  of  the  captivity  of 
the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  and  the  one  which  began  in  the 
twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  We  learn  from  Jere- 
miah that  Babylon  was  to  be  destroyed  after  the  accomplish- 
ment of  the  seventy  years’  service  of  Judah.*  If  the  destruc- 
tion of  Babylon  is  placed  in  b.c.  472,  in  which  year  fell  the 
thirty-second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspes  and  the  sixty-second 
year  of  his  age,  this  will  be  the  twenty-first  year  after  the  ex- 
piration of  the  seventy  years’  captivity  reckoned  from  the 
twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  b.c.  564.  This  calcula- 
tion for  the  ago  of  Darius  only  differs  from  that  heretofore 


* Jeremiah  xiv.  12. 


224 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


given,  derived  from  the  canon,  in  that  it  follows  the  canon  as 
amended  in  this  work.  The  time  at  which  “ Daniel  understood 
by  books  the  number  of  the  years,  whereof  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  that  he  would  accomplish 
seventy  }Tears  in  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem”*  is  placed  in  the 
first  year  of  Darius,  the  son  of  Ahasuerus.  This  is  intended 
for  Darius,  the  son  of  Hystaspes.  This  was  probably  in  b.c. 
495  or  494,  in  the  ninth  or  tenth  years  of  Darius,  or  the  first 
year  of  the  cycle,  which  began  in  b.c.  494,  of  which  he  was 
the  eponym.  It  is  possible  the  first  year  of  Darius  in  Babylon 
is  what  is  meant.  Darius,  in  the  inscription  of  Behistun,  places 
Aracus,  who  had  caused  a revolt  at  Babylon,  claiming  to  be 
Nabochodrossar,  the  son  of  Nabonidus,  as  the  ninth  king  taken 
in  battle.  Usually  one  year  may  be  allowed  for  each  cam- 
paign, and  if  they  are  continuous,  as  they  appear  to  have  been 
in  this  case,  each  king  taken  in  battle  may  denote  a j’ear  of  his 
reign.  This  also  brings  the  capture  of  Babylon  about  to  the 
ninth  year  of  Darius.  But  this  need  not  be  insisted  upon.  The 
first  year  of  Darius  may  be  that  of  his  accession  in  b.c.  503  ; 
but  the  year  b.c.  495  suits  exactly  the  circumstances  related,  for 
in  b.c.  494,  the  following  year,  terminates  the  seventy  years’ 
captivity,  reckoned  from  the  twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. We  may  suppose  that  Daniel  understood  the  words  of 
Jeremiah  were  fulfilled  by  the  capture  of  Babylon.  The  cir- 
cumstances were  such  as  to  lead  to  that  impression,  enforced 
as  they  were  by  his  strong  desire  for  the  reproach  of  his  people 
to  be  removed.  A period  of  twenty-one  years  appears  to  have 
been  understood  and  recognized,  for  we  find  it  made  the  occa- 
sion of  further  delays  upon  the  part  of  the  Persians.  Daniel 
at  this  time  utters  his  prophecy  of  the  coming  of  Messiah. 
“ Seventy  weeks  are  determined  upon  thy  people  and  upon 
thy  holy  city,  to  finish  the  transgression,  and  to  make  an  end 
of  sins,”  . . . “ and  to  anoint  the  Most  Holy.  Know  therefore 
and  understand,  that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  command- 
ment to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem,  unto  the  Messiah  the 
Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks,  and  threescore  and  two  weeks: 
the  street  shall  be  built  again,  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous 


* Daniel  ix.  2. 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA. 


225 


times.”  * The  seventy  weeks  denote  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years,  and  these  are  subdivided  into  three  periods:  seven  weeks, 
sixty- two  weeks,  and  one  week,  the  last  implied.  In  the  next 
chapter  it  is  learned  that  the  prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia 
had  withstood  twenty-one  days  the  answer  to  Daniel’s  prayer,  f 
These  are  to  be  taken  as  years,  just  as  the  seventy  weeks  stand 
for  four  hundred  and  ninety  years.  Twenty-one  years  added  to 
forty-nine  years,  the  seven  weeks  of  the  first  subdivision,  give 
seventy  years  for  tho  time  which  was  to  elapse  during  which 
the  city  was  to  be  built  in  troublous  times.  This  is  the  case  as 
laid  down  in  the  chronology.  From  the  termination  of  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  b.c.  494, 
unto  the  first  year  of  Darius  Notlius,  b.c.  424,  are  exactly 
seventy  years. 

The  scheino  of  tho  chronology  connected  with  the  sabbatical 
years  is  based  upon  the  period  of  nine  hundred  years.  By 
reference  to  the  chronological  table  a period  of  nine  hundred 
years,  reckoned  from  the  exodus,  b.c.  1397,  terminated  in  b.c. 
498,  and  in  this  year  also  came  to  an  end  the  seventy  years  of 
the  captivity,  reckoned  from  the  eighteenth  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. It  has  been  shown  in  treating  of  Hezekiah’s  reign  that 
lie  observed  the  sabbatical  years  during  his  reign.  King  Josiah 
also  instituted  a reform  in  his  reign,  and  followed  the  example 
of  Hezekiah.  The  series  of  sabbatical  years,  reckoned  from 
b.c.  1396-1395,  which  is  followed,  causes  these  years  to  fall  as 
follows : 


b.c.  610-9  sabbatical  year 

“ 604-3  “ “ 

“ 598-7  “ “ 

“ 592-1  “ “ 

“ 586-5  “ “ 


1-  2 years  of  Josiah. 

8-  9 11  “ 

16-17  “ “ 

23-24  “ “ 

30-31  “ 


The  sabbatical  year  of  the  8-9  years  of  Josiah  may  be  no- 
ticed. We  are  told  in  II.  Chronicles  xxxiv.  3,  “ For  in  the  eighth 
year  of  his  reign,  while  he  was  yet  young,  he  began  to  seek 
after  the  God  of  David  his  father.”  The  sabbatical  year  of 
Josiah’s  30-31  years  furnishes  a comment  upon  the  policy  of 
Necho  in  making  his  expedition  against  Charchemish  in  that 
year,  he  believing  he  could  not  be  interfered  with,  knowing  the 


* Daniel  ix.  24,  25. 


f Ibid.,  x.  13. 


226 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


character  of  this  year  and  the  prohibition  against  offensive  war- 
fare it  laid  upon  the  Jews.  The  disaster  which  befell  Josiah, 
with  this  view,  will  be  in  consequence  of  his  violation  of  the 
law  of  this  year.  Four  sabbatical  years  fell  in  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  and  four  in  the  reign  of  Josiah,  making  eight  in  these 
two  reigns.  These,  with,  perhaps,  two  others  observed  in  the 
early  part  of  their  history,  will  make  ten  sabbatical  years  ob- 
served by  the  Jews  previous  to  the  Babylonian  captivity.  In 
nine  hundred  years  there  should  bo  one  hundred  and  fifty  sab- 
batical years,  and  deducting  from  these  the  ten,  which  are  sup- 
posed, leaves  one  hundred  and  forty  sabbatical  years.  This  is 
the  term  of  one  hundred  and  forty  years  reckoned  from  the 
beginning  of  the  captivity  of  the  twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar down  to  the  second  year  of  Darius  Nothus,  which  was 
covered  by  the  seventy  years  of  that  captivity,  the  twenty-one 
supplemental  years,  and  the  seven  weeks  of  years  of  Daniel. 

In  Ezekiel  iv.  5 occurs,  the  days  of  the  iniquity  of  Israel  are 
three  hundred  and  ninety,  and  in  verse  6,  the  days  of  the 
iniquity  of  Judah  are  forty.  There  may  be  two  ways  of  under- 
standing these  statements.  The  numbers  either  refer  to  pei'iods 
of  years  or  some  form  of  iniquity  connected  with  them.  The 
periods  to  which  they  may  i*efer  ai’e  either  three  hundred  and 
ninety  and  forty  years  of  twelve  months  or  the  same  in  yeai-s  of 
ten  months.  In  the  latter  sense  the  three  hundred  and  ninety 
years  equal  thi’ee  hundred  and  twenty-five  years  of  twelve  months. 
The  forty  yeai’s  equal  thirty -three  and  one-third  years  of  twelve 
months.  The  three  hundred  and  ninety  years  of  twelve  months, 
counted  from  the  first  year  of  Jeroboam  I.,  end  with  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  eighteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  b.c.  498. 
The  three  hundred  and  ninety  years  of  ten  months,  or  the  three 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years  of  twelve  months  which  repre- 
sent them,  end  in  b.c.  563,  where  falls  the  twenty-third  year  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  the  year  in  which  the  last  company  of  the 
Jews  was  carried  into  captivity.  The  other  view  of  these  num- 
bers is  that  they  point  to  an  evil  existing  both  in  Judah  and  the 
kingdom  of  Israel.  It  is  that  in  Judah  they  used  a cycle  of 
forty  decimestrial  years  instead  of  the  jubilee  cycle  of  forty-two 
years.  By  the  use  of  the  cycle  of  forty  years  they  neglected 
the  sabbatical  and  jubilee  years.  It  is  said  in  verse  21  of  the 


IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA.  227 


last  chapter  of  II.  Chronicles,  that  the  Jews  were  carried  captive 
“To  fulfil  the  word  of  the  Lord  by  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah,  until 
the  land  had  enjoyed  her  sabbaths : for  as  long  as  she  lay  deso- 
late she  kept  sabbath,  to  fulfil  threescore  and  ten  years.”  The 
number  three  hundred  and  ninety  may  denote  thirteen  cycles 
each  of  thirty  years  of  ten  months,  each  equal  to  twenty- five 
years  of  twelve  months.  This  is  the  Apis  cycle  which  may  be 
supposed  to  be  the  one  introduced  by  Jeroboam  I.  with  the  Apis 
worship.  It  came  to  an  end  with  the  captivity  of  the  twenty- 
third  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  when  the  land  had  rest.  There 
remained  after  the  three  hundred  and  twenty-five  years  of 
twelve  months  accomplished  in  b.c.  5G3,  sixty-five  years,  in 
which  the  land  was  to  have  rest,  to  complete  the  three  hundred 
and  ninety  years  of  twelve  months,  there  being  sixty-five  sab- 
batical years  in  that  many  years. 

The  reader  must  not  confuse  the  four  hundred  and  ninety 
years  of  Daniel’s  prophecy  with  the  years  of  the  jubilee  cycle. 
This  mistake  may  be  made  because  this  number  equals  ten 
jubilee  cycles  of  forty-nine  years  each,  which  contain  four  hun- 
dred and  ninety  mixed  years  or  four  hundred  and  twenty  trojucal 
years.  The  basal  number  of  Daniel’s  prophecy  is  seventy. 
This  number  occurs  in  various  ways  in  technical  chronology. 
It  is  found  in  the  Egyptian  myth  of  the  five  intercalary  days. 
It  is  said  Mercury  played  at  dice  with  the  moon  and  won  from 
her  the  seventieth  part  of  her  light,  out  of  which  the  five  epa- 
gomenrn  were  made.  In  explaining  this  myth,  it  is  said  Ideler 
supposes  the  myth  contemplated  a lunar  year  of  three  hundred 
and  fifty  days,  one  seventieth  of  which  is  five  days,  and  that 
Scaliger  supposes  the  myth  wrongly  reported,  because  five  days 
is  not  one-seventieth  of  the  moon’s  light.  These  writers  over- 
look the  general  rule  for  assigning  the  numbers  of  days  to 
cycles,  years,  and  months,  that  in  no  case  is  the  poi’tion  of  a day 
allowed;  all  periods  are  reckoned  in  full  days,  and  when  neces- 
sary a day  or  days  are  afterwards  added  or  subtracted.  One- 
seventieth  of  the  moon’s  light  is  five  days  and  a small  part  of  a 
day  over.  The  myth  means  only  that  portion  of  the  moon’s 
light  which,  according  to  the  rule,  could  be  used  to  lengthen  the 
year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days.  Seventy  years  as  the 
term  of  the  life  of  man  is  mentioned  in  the  Book  of  Psalms  and 


228 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


by  Herodotus  in  his  History.  Herodotus  endeavors  to  describe 
the  cycle  connected  with  this  year,  and  appears  to  confuse  the 
year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty  days  and  an  intercalary  month 
every  six  years,  with  a cyclic  period  of  seventy  years  with  an 
intercalary  month  of  thirty  four  days  every  other  period,  or 
after  one  hundred  and  forty  years,  and  the  omission  of  one  day 
in  seven  hundred  and  seventy  years.  Seventy  years  is  a sub- 
division of  the  cycle  of  seven  hundred  and  seventy  yeai-s,  in 
which  time  the  tropical  year  advances  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
six  days,  twelve  hours  pZus,  in  the  vague  year,  which  is  the  time 
between  the  vernal  and  autumual  equinoxes.  If  a cycle  is  com- 
menced with  the  autumnal  equinox  on  the  first  day  of  a vague 
year,  then  after  seven  hundred  and  seventy  years  the  vernal 
equinox  will  be  on  the  first  day  of  the  vague  year,  and  if  the 
year  is  to  be  made  tropical  it  may  be  done  by  passing  over  the 
interval  between  the  two  equinoxes  as  intercalary,  and  recom- 
mencing the  year  at  the  autumnal  equinox. 

Jewish  chronology  has  so  far  been  treated  upon  the  basis  of  a 
vague  year.  The  Jewish  vague  year  was  made  to  begin  at  the 
vernal  equinox  in  b.c.  1397.  At  that  time  a concurrence 
between  the  Julian,  the  Egyptian,  and  the  Jewish  year  was 
established  to  be  April  2,  Pachons  2,  and  Abib  1.  Applying  the 
doctrine  of  the  cycle  of  seven  hundred  and  seventy  j’ears  to  the 
Jewish  year,  we  obtain  the  year  b.c.  627  (1397-770)  for  the 
renewal  of  the  date  1st  of  Abib  at  the  vernal  equinox.  With  the 
1st  of  Abib  at  the  vernal  equinox,  the  concurrence  in  b.c.  627  will 
be  March  27,  Athyr  3,  and  Abib  1.  The  new  table  for  the  corre- 
sponding dates  between  the  Jewish  and  Egyptian  years  will  be  : 

Jewish  Year.  Egyptian  Year. 

1st  of  the  first  month  concurs  with  Athyr  3. 


second 

It 

tl 

Khoiakh  3. 

third 

tl 

a 

Tybi  3. 

fourth 

tl 

tt 

Mechir  3. 

fifth 

tt 

tt 

Pliamenoth  3. 

sixth 

It 

tt 

Pharmuthi  3. 

seventh 

tl 

it 

Pachons  8. 

eighth 

It 

tt 

Payni  8. 

ninth 

It 

a 

Epiphi  8. 

tenth 

It 

a 

Mesori  8. 

eleventh 

it 

tt 

Thoth  3. 

twelfth 

tl 

tt 

Phaophi  3. 

IN  CONNECTION  WITH  BABYLON  AND  PERSIA. 


229 


In  II.  Kings  xxv.  8 the  date  of  the  destruction  of  the  temple 
in  the  nineteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  by  Nebuzar-adan, 
captain  of  the  guard,  is  placed  on  the  7th  of  the  fifth  month. 
The  7th  of  the  fifth  month  by  the  new  table  corresponds  to  the 
9th  of  Phamenoth,  and  the  9th  of  Phamenoth  in  b.c.  567,  in 
which  year  falls  the  nineteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  ac- 
cording to  the  chronology  I have  followed,  concurs  with  the 
16th  of  July.  This  is  another  instance  of  this  famous  date. 
Further,  by  the  lunar  year  with  the  full  moon  of  the  first  month 
following  the  vernal  equinox,  this  will  also  be  the  date  of  the 
7th  of  the  fifth  month.  The  lunar  dates  of  the  1st  of  the  first 
five  months  of  the  lunar  year  in  b.c.  567  will  be  as  follows: 


1st  of  first 
“ second 
“ third 
“ fourth 
“ fifth 


month  concurs  with  13th  of  March. 

“ “ “ 11th  of  April. 

“ “ “ 11th  of  May. 

“ “ “ 9th  of  June. 

“ “ “ 9th  of  July. 


These  are  dates  of  the  visible  new  moon.  Corresponding 
days  for  the  first  seven  days  of  the  fifth  month  for  a Jewish 
vague  year  (era  of  b.c.  627),  and  the  luni-solar  year  of  b.c.  567 
(reckoned  from  vernal  equinox),  and  the  Julian  and  Egyptian 
years  are  : 


July 


Jewish  Vague  Year.  Jewish  Lunar  Year. 

9 = Phamenoth  2 = 1st  of  fifth  month. 


10=  « 

3 = 1st  of  fifth  month  = 

lst-2d  “ 

tl 

11=  “ 

T3 

II 

U 

It  __ 

2d-3d  “ 

It 

12=  “ 

6 = 3d 

It 

tl  __ 

3d-4th  “ 

it 

13=  “ 

6 = 4th 

tt 

tl  _ 

4th-5th  “ 

It 

14=  “ 

7 = 5th 

tt 

a _ 

5th-6th  “ 

tl 

15=  “ 

8 = 6th 

it 

“ = 

6th -7  th  “ 

It 

16=  “ 

9 = 7th 

it 

a __ 

7th-8th  « 

It 

In  b.c.  567,  July  16  fell 

on  Thursday. 

The  concurrence  of  the  7th  of  the  fifth  month  by  the  vague 
year  of  the  era  b.c.  1397  will  be  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
six  days  earlier,  January  11  and  Thoth  3.  A luni-solar  year 
reckoned  from  the  preceding  autumnal  equinox  will  be  as  fol- 
lows : 

b.c.  568. — Full  moon  on  the  day  of  the  autumnal  equinox, 

20 


230 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


September  30.  The  lunar  year  began  with  the  new  moon  of 
September,  visible  on  the  17th  day  of  the  month. 


1st  of  first  month, 

“ second  “ 

“ third  “ 

“ fourth  “ 

“ fifth  “ 


b.c.  568,  concurs  with  September  17,  visible  new  moon. 
“ “ “ October  16,  “ “ 

“ “ “ November  15,  “ “ 

“ “ “ December  14,  “ “ 

b.c.  567,  “ “ January  13,  “ “ 


Corresponding  dates  for  the  Julian,  Egyptian,  Jewish  vague 
(era  b.c.  1397),  Jewish  luni-solar  (reckoned  from  autumnal  equi- 
nox), for  the  7th  of  fifth  month  are: 


Julian.  Egyptian.  Jewish  Vague  Year.  Jewish  Lunar  Year. 


January 

5 = Intercalary 

2 = 1st  of  fifth  month. 

ll 

6=  “ 

3=  2d 

It 

ll 

ll 

7=  “ 

4=  3d 

<< 

ll 

u 

8=  “ 

5=  4th 

It 

ll 

it 

9 = Thoth 

1=  5th 

It 

ll 

It 

10=  “ 

2=  6th 

It 

It 

it 

11=  “ 

3=  7th 

ll 

ll 

It 

12=  “ 

4=  8th 

It 

ll 

ll 

13=  “ 

5=  9th 

ll 

It 

= 1st  of  fifth  month. 

ll 

14=  “ 

6 = 10th 

It 

ll 

= lst-2d  “ “ 

It 

15=  “ 

7 = 11th 

ll 

tl 

= 2d-3d  “ “ 

ll 

16=  “ 

8 = 12th 

ll 

ll 

= 3d-4th  “ “ 

ll 

17=  “ 

9=  13th 

U 

It 

= 4th-6th  “ “ 

ll 

18=  “ 

10=  14th 

ll 

ll 

= 5th-6th  “ “ 

ll 

19=  “ 

11  = 15th 

ll 

ll 

= 6th-7th  “ “ 

il 

20=  “ 

12  = 16th 

ll 

It 

= 7th-8th  “ “ 

In  b.c.  567,  January  20  fell  on  Friday.  I have  shown  in  a 
former  chapter  that  the  temple  of  Solomon  was  founded  upon 
the  22d  of  January,  b.c.  918,  and  now  that  its  destruction  was 
on  the  20th  of  January,  b.c.  567.  According  to  this  the  temple 
stood  three  hundred  and  fifty-one  tropical  years.  Both  of  these 
dates  are  twenty-two  days  after  the  winter  solstice. 

The  date  of  b.c.  918  was  the  20th  of  the  second  month  of  the 
Jewish  vague  year,  and  that  of  b.c.  567,  the  7th  of  the  fifth 
month,  is  of  the  Jewish  luni-solar  year,  reckoned  from  the 
autumnal  equinox. 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


231 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 

St.  Matthew  opens  his  Gospel  with  the  sentence:  “The  book 
of  the  generation  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  son  of  David,  the  son  of 
Abraham.”  He  gives  two  schemes : in  one  are  forty  names  in 
succession  from  Abraham  to  Christ,  each  for  a generation  ; in  the 
other,  he  states,  there  are  fourteen  generations  from  Abraham  to 
David;  “from  David  until  the  carrying  away  into  Babylon  are 
fourteen  generations ; and  from  the  carrying  away  into  Babylon 
unto  Christ  are  fourteen  generations.”  In  the  list  of  names 
before  mentioned  David’s  is  the  fourteenth,  and  the  twenty- 
eighth  name  is  Jechonias,  begotten  by  Josias  “about  the  time 
they  were  carried  away  to  Babylon,”  showing  that  the  list, 
although  containing  only  forty  names,  is  similar  for  the  first  two 
periods  with  the  scheme  of  fourteen  generations  for  each.  I 
have  disregarded  the  Jewish  custom,  which  would  make  Phares 
the  grandson  of  Judah,  and  the  two  to  stand  for  three  genera- 
tions. The  list  of  Matthew  is  a selected  list;  the  corresponding 
list  in  Luke  iii.  gives  fifty-five  names  from  Abraham  to  Christ, 
and  forty-two  names  from  David  to  Christ.  The  two  numbers, 
forty  and  forty-two,  so  characteristic  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament, naturally  suggest  themselves  as  bases  in  case  of  selected 
lists  of  names.  It  is  evident  forty  generations  cannot  be  divided 
into  three  periods  each  of  fourteen  generations,  but  it  can  be 
into  three  periods,  one  of  twelve  and  the  other  two  of  fourteen 
generations.  If  the  periods  for  both  schemes  are  substantially 
the  same,  twelve  generations  of  one  will  correspond  with  four- 
teen generations  of  the  other,  and  each  must  use  for  generations 
different  terms  of  years.  Furthei',  the  three  periods  are  of  dif- 
ferent lengths, — this  we  know  from  the  chronologies  of  both  pro- 
fane and  sacred  history, — and  to  give  them  a real  basis  of  fact 
they  must  be  explained  to  be  composed  of  generations  of 
different  lengths.  First,  as  to  the  periods,  these  are  not  taken 
arbitrarily,  but  because  some  notable  event  falls  at  their  begin- 


232 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


nings,  and  this  is  one  usually  found  in  chronological  systems  as 
an  epoch  to  and  from  which  years  are  reckoned.  The  first 
period  ends  with  David ; this  is  to  all  intents  the  same  as  the 
epoch  of  the  foundation  of  the  temple  of  Solomon.  The  second 
period  ends  with  Jechonias,  and  this  is  practically  the  same  as 
the  epoch  of  the  destruction  of  the  temple,  in  the  nineteenth 
year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  there  was  a carrying  away  into 
Babylon  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  this  king.  St.  Paul,  in  Acts 
xiii.  18-22,  appears  to  make  the  event  of  the  foundation  of  the 
temple  of  Solomon  the  basis  of  his  calculation  of  the  time  of 
the  judges.  He  gives  forty  years  for  the  wilderness;  for  the 
judges  about  the  space  of  four  hundred  and  fifty  years ; Saul, 
forty  years,  who  was  followed  by  King  David.  The  term  of 
four  hundred  and  fifty  years  has  been  a puzzle  to  chronologers, 
because  if  the  detail  of  numbers,  as  given  in  the  Book  of  Judges, 
is  examined,  it  is  wide  of  the  mark.  I have  shown  that  the  four 
hundred  and  eighty  years  of  I.  Kings  vi.  1 is  a term  of  years  of 
twelve  months,  reaching  from  the  coming  out  of  Egypt,  and 
covering  the  year  of  the  foundation  of  the  temple  of  Solomon. 
St.  Paul  appears  to  have  been  acquainted  with  this  number,  or 
rather  its  equivalent  expressed  in  years  of  ten  months.  Four 
hundred  and  seventy-nine  years  of  twelve  months  equal  five 
hundred  and  seventy-four  years  and  eight  months  in  decimestrial 
years;  and  the  period,  when  extended  to  a date  in  the  second 
month  of  the  four  hundred  and  eightieth  year,  is  only  a few 
days  short  of  five  hundred  and  seventy-five  years.  From  this 
amount  are  to  be  subtracted  one  hundred  and  twenty-three 
years  plus,  which  represent  the  items  of  the  wanderings  in  the 
wilderness,  the  reigns  of  Saul  and  David,  and  three  years  plus 
of  Solomon,  and  the  remainder  of  four  hundred  and  fifty-two 
years  minus  comes  within  the  force  of  the  words  of  St.  Paul. 

Second,  the  word  generation  as  used  in  chronological  systems 
does  not  always  signify  the  same  term  of  years.  In  its  origin 
the  word,  in  the  first  instance,  was  applied  to  the  length  of 
human  life,  and  the  average  age  of  a parent  at  the  birth  of  his 
first  child.  These  terms  in  a second  stage  were  adapted  to 
astronomical  periods,  or  their  subdivisions.  Various  refinements 
on  this  system  were  in  vogue.  The  Roman  sseculum  was  of  the 
length  of  one  hundred  and  ten  years.  This  was  derived  from 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


233 


the  natural  sseculum,  which  is  described  to  be  the  length  of  life 
of  the  person  who  lived  longest  of  all  those  who  were  born  on 
the  date  of  the  foundation  of  a town.  Other  terras  are  given 
for  the  sseculum,  one  of  which  is  one  hundred  years.  According 
to  Niebuhr,  one  hundred  years  was  the  heroic  age.  In  the 
Psalms  of  David  and  in  Herodotus  threescore  years  and  ten  are 
spoken  of  as  the  length  of  human  life.  In  the  Bible  both 
Joseph  and  Joshua  are  said  to  have  lived  one  hundred  and  ten 
years.  Moses  lived  one  hundred  and  twenty  years,  and  if  these 
were  years  of  ten  months,  he  died  aged  one  hundred  years  of 
twelve  months.  One  hundred  years  contain  four  cycles  or  gen- 
erations of  twenty-five  years,  and  in  connection  with  dates  ot 
the  vague  year  these  are  lunar  periods.  Cycles  are  also  used  for 
generations.  The  cycle  of  eighty-four  years  employed  by  the 
Jews  after  the  return  from  the  Babylonian  captivity  may  be  cited. 
It  is  particularly  of  interest  because  it  also  is  subdivided  into 
four  minor  cycles,  each  of  twenty-one  years,  which  number  of 
years  is  so  common  as  the  legal  age.  Eighty-four  years  contain 
twelve  periods  of  seven  years,  a number  also  of  common  use  in 
connection  with  age.  Seventy  years  is  an  astronomical  period, 
being  a mean  of  the  precession  of  the  equinoxes  of  one  degree 
in  seventy  years.  Forty  years  is  also  used  for  the  term  of  a 
generation,  and,  according  to  Herodotus,  the  Egyptians  made 
use  of  thirty-three  and  one-third  years  for  a generation,  three 
of  which  made  up  a century.  Of  these  generations  the  follow- 
ing are  indicated  in  the  Bible : generations  of  one  hundred,  one 
hundred  and  ten,  seventy,  eighty-four,  and  forty  yeai’s.  A gen- 
eration of  forty  years  of  twelve  months  is  found;  there  are 
twelve  such  between  the  exodus  and  the  foundation  of  Solomon’s 
temple ; also,  a generation  of  forty  decimestrial  years  which 
equalled  the  Herodotan  generation  of  thirty -three  and  one-third 
years.  Further,  we  may  include  in  the  generation  of  one  hun- 
dred years  its  four  subdivisions  of  twenty-five  years  each. 

If  the  length  of  each  of  the  three  periods  can  be  established 
from  statements  and  details  of  years  found  in  the  Bible  and 
from  other  sources  which  are  not  contradictory,  and  if  the  total 
of  years  for  each  of  these  periods  may  be  divided  into  fourteen 
generations,  using  any  one  of  the  binds  just  described  ; or  if  the 
division  of  one  period  into  twelve  generations  and  the  other 

20* 


234 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


two  into  fourteen  generations,  each  in  a similar  manner,  is  pos- 
sible, the  conclusion  is  reached  that  the  chronology  which 
permits  this  is  in  accordance  with  the  system  indicated  by 
Matthew,  provided,  however,  it  is  fairly  done,  and  no  perversion 
of  any  biblical  statement  is  attempted. 

THE  FIRST  PERIOD  FROM  ABRAHAM  TO  THE  FOUNDATION  OF  THE 
TEMPLE  OF  SOLOMON. 

In  Genesis  xvii.  1-14  it  is  said  God  made  a covenant  with 
Abram  when  he  was  ninety  and  nine  years  old.  Its  purport 
was  that  Abraham  was  to  be  the  father  of  many  nations,  and 
the  blessings  of  the  covenant  were  to  be  extended  to  Abraham’s 
seed  after  him.  “I  will  establish  my  covenant  between  me  and 
thee  and  thy  seed  after  thee  in  their  generations,  for  an  ever- 
lasting covenant,  to  be  a God  unto  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after 
thee.”  God  further  covenants  to  give  to  Abraham  and  his  seed 
after  him  the  land  wherein  he  is  a stranger,  all  the  land  of 
Canaan,  for  an  everlasting  possession.  In  a previous  chapter 
(xv.  18-21)  this  covenant  is  also  spoken  of,  and  the  verses 
which  immediately  precede  it  contain  the  prophecy  that  the 
seed  of  Abraham  “ shall  be  a stranger  in  a land  that  is  not 
theirs,  and  shall  serve  them;  and  they  shall  afflict  them  four 
hundred  years.  . . . But  in  the  fourth  generation  they  shall 
come  hither  again.”  This,  interpreted  by  the  light  of  subsequent 
events,  refers  principally  to  the  sojourn  of  the  children  of  Israel 
in  Egypt.  In  Exodus  xii.  40,41  it  is  said:  “Now  the  sojourn- 
ing of  the  children  of  Israel,  who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  was  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years.  And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end  of 
the  four  hundred  and  thirty  years,  even  the  selfsame  day  it 
came  to  pass,  that  all  the  hosts  of  the  Lord  went  out  from  the 
land  of  Egypt.”  Although  this  rendering  of  the  text  does  not 
expressly  state  that  the  children  of  Israel  dwelt  in  Egypt  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years,  it  has  been  supposed  to  have  that 
meaning.  The  affliction  for  four  hundred  years,  the  return  in 
the  fourth  generation,  and  the  sojourn  in  Egypt  of  four  hundred 
and  thirty  years  have  been  supposed  to  be  conflicting.  But 
there  is  a scheme  by  which  they  may  be  harmonized.  The 
affliction  was  not  coterminous  with  their  sojourn  in  Egypt.  We 
are  expressly  told  of  the  kind  treatment  Jacob  and  his  family 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


235 


received  when  they  entered  Egypt;  but  how  long  did  this  last? 
We  may  assume  that  while  Joseph  was  alive  his  influence  was 
powerful  enough  to  protect  his  brethren.  Joseph  was  thirty 
years  old  when  he  stood  before  Pharaoh  at  the  beginning  of  the 
seven  years  of  plenty,  and  when  he  reveals  himself  to  his 
brethren  he  tells  them  that  the  famine  had  been  two  years  in 
the  land.  From  this  it  appears  he  was  forty  years  old  when 
Jacob,  his  father,  entered  Egypt.  If  the  sojourn  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  is  calculated  from  the  entrance  of  Jacob,  and  as 
Joseph  died  one  hundred  and  ten  years  old,  his  death  was  seventy 
years  after  the  beginning  of  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.  If  the  fourth 
generation  and  the  four  hundred  years  are  synonymous,  they  all 
are  harmonized  in  the  following  way : 


From  entrance  of  Jacob  to  death  of  Joseph 70  years. 

From  death  of  Joseph  to  exodus 360  “ 

Sojourn  in  Egypt 430  “ 


The  affliction  began  seventy  years  after  the  entrance  of  Jacob, 
and  ended  when  the  Jordan  was  crossed  and  they  returned  to 
Canaan. 


From  death  of  Joseph  to  exodus  360  years. 

From  exodus  to  crossing  of  Jordan 40  “ 

400  “ 


They  were  to  return  to  Canaan  in  the  fourth  generation. 
Jacob  was  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  old  when  he  entered 
Egypt,  and  the  death  of  Joseph  was  seventy  years  afterwards, 
or  two  hundred  years  from  the  birth  of  Jacob.  This  represents 
two  generations,  each  of  one  hundred  years,  one  for  Jacob  and 
one  for  Joseph,  or  Jacob’s  immediate  descendants.  The  first 
generation  of  one  hundred  years  in  Egypt  began  at  the  death 
of  Joseph,  when  we  now  suppose  began  the  afflictions  of  the 
children  of  Israel ; it  was  the  seventy-first  year  after  the  entrance 
of  Jacob  ; the  second  century  began  the  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
first  year  afterwards,  the  third  century  began  with  the  two 
hundred  and  seventy -first  year,  and  the  fourth  century  began 
with  the  three  hundred  and  seventy-first  year  after  the  descent  of 
Jacob ; and  as  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan  was  four  hundred  and 


236 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


seventy  years  after  the  descent  of  Jacob,  it  just  falls  within  the 
fourth  century,  if  the  reckoning  of  years  in  the  case  of  the  fifth 
generation  was  from  the  autumnal  equinox,  or  some  date  follow- 
ing the  crossing  of  the  Jordan.  In  this  way  the  three  state- 
ments we  have  been  considering  may  be  carried  out. 

I.  Scheme  of  Twelve  Generations  from  Abraham  to  the  Foundation 


of  the  Temple  of  Solomon. 

Abraham  to  Isaac  (Genesis  xxi.  5) 100  years. 

Isaac  to  Jacob  (Genesis  xxv.  26) 60  “ 

Age  of  Jacob,  entering  Egypt  (Genesis  xlvii.  9)  . . . 130  “ 

Sojourn  in  Egypt  (Exodus  xii.  40) 430  “ 

720  years. 

Exodus  to  foundation  of  temple  (I.  Kings  vi.  1)  . . . 480  “ 

1200  “ 


According  to  this  scheme  there  are  twelve  hundred  years 
from  Abraham  to  the  temple,  or  twelve  generations  of  one  hun- 
dred j^ears  each. 

II.  Scheme  of  Fourteen  Generations. 

In  Genesis  xxxvii.  is  related  the  events  connected  with  the 
bondage  of  Joseph.  The  account  commences  with  the  state- 
ment that  Joseph  was  seventeen  years  old.  If  Joseph  went  into 
Egypt  when  he  was  seventeen  years  old,  and  if  from  this  point 
is  calculated  the  sojourn  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  in  Egypt,  the 
time  from  Abraham  to  the  exodus  will  be  shortened  twenty- 
three  years,  the  difference  between  the  ages  seventeen  and  forty 
years  of  Joseph.  The  items  will  then  be : 


Abraham  to  Isaac 100  years. 

Isaac  to  Jacob 60  “ 

Jacob  to  captivity  of  Joseph 107  “ 

Sojourn  in  Egypt 430  “ 

Exodus  to  temple 479  “ 


1176  “ 

This  equals  exactly  fourteen  generations  of  eighty-four  years. 
Eighty-four  years  was  a cycle  used  by  the  Jews  after  the  return 
from  the  captivity  to  Babylon. 

The  difference  of  one  year  between  the  two  items,  four  hun- 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


237 


dred  and  eighty  and  four  hundred  and  seventy-nine,  for  the  time 
between  the  exodus  and  the  temple  arises  from  the  fact  that  in 
one  case  the  term  is  calculated  from  the  era  of  the  tabernacle, 
which  was  the  second  year  of  the  exodus,  so  that  the  four  hun- 
dred and  seventy-ninth  year  from  that  will  be  the  four  hundred 
and  eightieth  year  of  the  exodus.  In  the  other  case  the  calcu- 
lation is  from  the  exodus,  and  there  are  four  hundred  and 
seventy-nine  years  plus  down  to  the  foundation  of  the  temple 
in  the  four  hundred  and  eightieth  year. 

Neither  of  the  schemes  just  described  is  the  favored  one  by 
chronologers.  They  incline  to  that  which  reckons  the  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years  of  Exodus  xii.  40,  from  the  call  of 
Abraham  to  the  exodus.  The  calculation  is  begun  from  the 
time  Abraham  was  seventy-five  years  old.  It  is  as  follows : 


From  call  of  Abraham  to  birth  of  Isaac 25  years. 

From  Isaac  to  birth  of  Jacob 60  “ 

Age  of  Jacob,  entering  Egypt 130  “ 

Israelites  in  Egypt 215  “ 

Total 430  “ 


This  scheme  has  for  its  foundation  a different  reading  of  the 
passage  in  Exodus  xii.  40,  41,  found  in  the  Alexandrian  MS.  of 
the  LXX.  “The  sojourning  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  their 
fathers,  which  they  sojourned  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  in  the 
land  of  Egypt,  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years.”  Also,  an 
inference  from  tbe  genealogy  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  found  in 
Exodus  vi.  18-20  and  Numbers  xxvi.  59.  The  genealogy  of 
the  descendants  of  Judah  also  shows  that  Hezron,  the  son  of 
Pharez,  and  Ram,  the  son  of  the  former,  and  Amminadab,  the 
son  of  Ram,  are  the  three  generations  which  were  born  in 
Egypt,  because  Nahshon,  the  son  of  Amminadab,  was  the  prince 
of  Judah  at  the  time  of  the  exodus.  These  have  led  to  a 
confirmatory  interpretation  of  a passage  in  the  writings  of  St. 
Paul  (Galatians  iii.  15-17).  But  the  passage  is  sufficiently  vague 
for  it  to  apply  to  this  and  the  opposing  scheme  already  discussed. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  was  written  by  St.  Paul  to  resist  a 
Judaizing  tendency  among  the  believers.  Certain  among  them 
were  teaching  that  the  observance  of  the  ceremonial  require- 
ments of  the  law  of  Moses  was  essential  to  salvation.  St.  Paul 


238 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


tells  them  : “ But  that  no  man  is  justified  by  the  law  in  the  sight 
of  God,  it  is  evident : for,  The  just  shall  live  by  faith.”  He  tells 
them,  Abraham  was  justified  by  faith,  and  alludes  to  the  promise 
made  to  Abraham  in  the  following  language  : “ Brethren,  I speak 
after  the  manner  of  men ; Though  it  be  but  a man’s  covenant, 
yet  if  it  be  confirmed,  no  man  disannulled,  or  addeth  thereto. 
Now  to  Abraham  and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made.  He 
saith  not,  And  to  seeds,  as  of  many;  but  as  of  one,  And  to  thy 
seed,  which  is  Christ.  And  this  I say,  that  the  covenant,  that 
was  confirmed  before  of  God  in  Christ,  the  law,  which  was  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years  after,  cannot  disannul,  that  it  should 
make  the  promise  of  none  effect.”  Some  have  claimed  that  the 
last  clause  virtually  asserts  that  between  the  covenant  with 
Abraham  and  the  exodus  there  elapsed  only  four  hundred  and 
thirty  years ; but  in  opposition  to  this  St.  Paul’s  argument  may 
be  put  in  this  way:  the  children  of  Israel  were  saved  and 
brought  out  of  Egypt  by  the  covenant  which  was  confirmed  by 
God,  and  not  by  obedience  to  the  law  of  Moses,  which  was  not 
promulgated  until  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after  the  be- 
ginning of  their  sojourn  in  Egypt.  All  this  time  they  were 
without  the  law  of  Moses,  yet  they  were  preserved,  so  the  same 
covenant,  which  was  confirmed  in  Christ,  cannot  be  disannulled 
by  the  law. 

Without  any  pretence  being  made  to  decide  between  these 
schemes,  I wish  to  show  how  the  statement  in  the  Septuagint 
conforms  to  that  of  Matthew.  To  do  this  I make  the  sojourn 
in  Egypt  to  last  two  hundred  and  ten  years,  instead  of  two 
hundred  and  fifteen.  This  is  done  because  seventy  years  is  the 
generation  adapted  to  this  scheme,  and  the  genealogies  of  Judah 
and  Levi  show  that  three  generations  were  born  and  had  died 
in  Egypt,  and  three  generations  of  seventy  years  equal  two 
hundred  and  ten  years.  It  begins  seventy  years  after  the  birth 
of  Abraham.  We  are  told,  in  Genesis  xi.  31,  that  Terah  took 
Abram,  his  son,  and  Lot,  his  grandson,  and  went  forth  from  Ur 
of  the  Chaldees,  to  go  to  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  they  came  to 
Haran  and  dwelt  there.  In  Genesis  xii.  1 we  learn  that  Abram 
was  commanded  by  God,  “ Get  thee  out  of  thy  country,  and 
from  thy  kindred,  and  from  thy  father’s  house,  unto  a land  that 
I will  shew  thee.”  At  this  time  Abram  was  in  Haran,  and  in 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


239 


xii.  4 we  are  told  he  was  seventy-five  years  old.  Allowing  five 
years  for  residence  in  Haran,  Abraham  was  seventy  years  old 
when  he  departed  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,  or  his  native 
country.  Abraham,  when  he  departed  from  Ur,  began  to  dwell 
in  a land  which  was  not  his;  the  pi’ophecy  is  retrospective.  The 
basis  of  this  scheme  is  substantially  the  same  as  the  one  just 
described,  only  in  the  first  case  the  calculation  is  from  the  de- 
parture from  Haran,  and  in  the  last  it  is  counted  from  the  going 
away  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees. 


III.  Scheme  of  Seventy  Years  to  a Generation. 


Age  of  Abraham,  departing  from  Ur 
To  the  birth  of  Isaac 
To  the  birth  of  Jacob 
To  descent  into  Egypt 
Sojourn  in  Egypt 


430  years 


400  years 


Exodus  to  temple 


70  years 
30  “ 

60 

It 

130 

It 

210 

it 

500 

It 

480 

a 

980 

tt 

Nine  hundred  and  eighty  years  are  equal  to  fourteen  genera- 
tions of  seventy  years  each.  The  four  hundred  and  thirty  years 
of  the  sojourn  in  a strange  land  begin  with  the  departure  of 
Abraham  from  Ur,  and  the  four  hundred  years  during  which 
the  seed  of  Abraham  were  to  be  afflicted  begin  with  the  birth 
of  Isaac,  the  first  representative  of  his  seed,  and  end  at  the 
exodus  from  Egypt. 

SECOND  PERIOD  OP  FOURTEEN  GENERATIONS. 

If  the  period  between  David  and  the  carrying  away  to  Baby- 
lon be  divided  into  fourteen  generations,  a different  term  of 
years  must  be  employed  for  a generation. 

The  detail  of  the  years  of  the  reigns  of  the  kings  of  Judah, 
from  Eehoboam  to  Zedekiah,  inclusive  of  both,  makes  a total  of 
three  hundred  and  ninety-three  years  and  six  months  ; and  if  to 
these  are  added  eighty  years  for  Solomon’s  and  David’s  reigns, 
the  period  is  only  four  hundred  and  seventy-three  years  plus. 
Ho  allowance  is  made  for  overlapping  years  of  reigns,  yet  the 
period  is  numerically  less  than  the  time  from  the  exodus  to  the 
foundation  of  the  temple,  eighty-three  years  after  the  accession 


240 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


of  David.  But  if  the  period  is  counted  from  the  foundation  of 
the  temple,  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  year  of  Solomon,  we 
have  for  the  reign  of  Solomon,  after  that  event,  thirty-seven 
years,  plus  the  time  from  Rehoboam  to  a date  in  the  first  year 
of  Zedekiah,  three  hundred  and  eighty-three  years,  which  make 
a total  of  four  hundred  and  twenty  years,  or  fourteen  genera- 
tions of  thirty  years  each.  This,  upon  examination,  is  not  with- 
out objections,  because  no  allowance  is  made  for  overlapping  of 
reigns.  Still,  the  calculation  of  four  hundred  and  twenty  years 
ends  with  a carrying  into  Babylon  in  the  seventh  year  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar (Jeremiah  lii.  28),  which  may  have  concurred  in 
part  with  the  first  year  of  Zedekiah. 

The  chronology,  as  followed  in  this  book,  treats  these  years 
as  decimestrial  years.  Overlappings  of  reigns  are  allowed,  the 
joint  reign  of  Jehoram  and  Jehoshaphat  for  four  years  is  taken 
into  account,  synchronisms  between  the  lines  of  Judah  and 
Israel  are  adhered  to,  and  a system  is  followed  which  closes  all 
gaps  in  the  two  lines  not  otherwise  accounted  for,  with  the  result 
that,  between  the  foundation  of  the  temple  in  b.c.  918  to  the 
captivity  of  the  eighteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jeremiah 
lii.  29)  in  b.c.  568,  there  are  three  hundred  and  fifty  years,  or 
fourteen  generations  of  twenty-five  years  each,  which  are  equal 
to  four  hundred  and  twenty  decimestrial  years,  or  fourteen  gen- 
erations each  of  thirty  decimestrial  years.  It  may  also  be  noticed 
that  the  difference  between  four  hundred  and  twenty  years  of 
twelve  months  and  the  same  number  of  years  of  ten  months  is 
seventy  years  of  twelve  months,  which  was  the  term  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity. 

THIRD  PERIOD  OF  FOURTEEN  GENERATIONS. 

This  period  is  not  of  the  length  of  either  of  the  two  preceding. 
In  the  usual  chronology  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  from 
which  is  reckoned  the  first  Babylonian  captivity,  has  about  the 
epoch  of  b.c.  605.  The  captivity  of  the  seventh  year  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar is  about  B.c.  598,  and  that  of  his  eighteenth  year  is 
b.c.  585.  The  era  of  the  birth  of  Christ  is  in  dispute.  Chro- 
nologers  have  placed  it  in  all  the  years  from  b.c.  7 to  a.d.  3, 
inclusive,  of  the  vulgar  era.  We  have,  following  any  of  the 
above  epochs,  b.c.  605,  b.c.  598,  b.c.  585,  for  the  beginning  of  the 


THE  GENERATIONS  OF  JESUS  CHRIST. 


241 


third  period,  a term  of  years  to  the  birth  of  Christ  which  is 
reduced  or  lengthened  by  assuming  the  latter  event  to  have 
been  anywhere  between  seven  years  before  and  three  years  after 
the  vulgar  era.  Since  fourteen  generations  of  forty-two  years 
each  equal  five  hundred  and  eighty-eight  years,  the  epoch  b.c. 
585,  for  the  eighteenth  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  the  only  one 
that  comes  at  all  near  the  amount  of  any  of  the  possible  gener- 
ations used  to  make  up  the  fourteen.  It  may  be  said  for  the 
generation  of  forty-two  years  that  it  is  thoroughly  a Jewish 
number.  I have  endeavored  to  show  in  previous  chapters  that 
this  was  the  length  of  the  Jewish  jubilee  cycle.  It  also  occurs 
as  the  total  of  the  generations  from  Abraham  to  Christ  (14  X 3). 
The  chronology  of  this  book  places  the  captivity  of  the 
eighteenth  of  Nebuchadnezzar  in  b.c.  568.  Since  fourteen  gener- 
ations, each  of  forty  years,  equal  five  hundred  and  sixty  years, 
this  chronology  also  conforms  to  the  required  number  of  gener- 
ations, allowing  for  an  error  in  the  vulgar  era  of  the  birth 
of  Christ.  Forty  is  a well-known  number  applied  to  a genera- 
tion, and  it  is  also  found  associated  with  the  periods  of  fourteen 
generations,  because  Matthew,  in  his  list,  only  gives  the  names 
for  forty  generations.  We  may  notice  here  one  of  those  con- 
fusing interchanges  between  years  of  twelve  and  ten  months. 
Fourteen  generations  of  forty-two  years  equal  five  hundred  and 
eighty-eight.  Taking  this  number  without  any  reference  to  the 
term  of  forty -two  years,  which  implies  a year  of  twelve  months, 
and  regarding  them  as  years  of  ten  months,  they  equal  four 
hundred  and  ninety  years  of  twelve  months,  which  is  the  period 
predicted  by  Daniel  for  the  coming  of  the  Messiah.  The  twenty- 
one  years  of  Daniel  in  connection  with  the  captivity  of  the 
twenty-third  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  following  the  chronology 
of  this  book,  came  to  an  end  in  b.c.  493,  and  the  seven  genera- 
tions of  seventy  years  (four  hundred  and  ninety  years)  end  at 
b.c.  3,  the  most  approved  epoch  of  the  birth  of  Christ. 


21 


242 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

MANETHO  AND  THE  EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM 

EGYPT. 

Josephus’s  history,  “The  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,”  compiled 
principally  from  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  was  attacked  by  certain 
Egypto-Greek  writers,  who  charged  him  with  giving  his  nation 
too  great  antiquity;  they  claimed  that  the  Jews  were  of  a late 
date.  To  defend  his  history  and  controvert  these  charges  he 
wrote  the  books  which  are  known  as  “ Against  Apion,”  one  of 
these  critics.  In  refutation,  Josephus  brings  the  testimony  of 
the  Egyptians  themselves,  as  contained  in  the  history  compiled 
by  Manetho  for  the  king,  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.  While  using 
Manetho  in  this  way,  he  does  not  hesitate  to  charge  him  with 
giving  two  different  accounts  of  the  same  event,  the  departure 
of  the  children  of  Israel  from  Egypt.  The  two  stories  are  given 
in  the  above-mentioned  dissertation  against  Apion.*  The  first 
story  is  as  follows : 

“ There  was  a king  of  ours  whose  name  was  Timaus.  Under 
him  it  came  to  pass,  I know  not  how,  that  God  was  averse  to  us, 
and  there  came,  after  a surprising  manner,  men  of  ignoble  birth 
out  of  the  eastern  parts,  and  had  boldness  enough  to  make  an 
expedition  into  our  country,  and  with  ease  subdued  it  by  force, 
yet  without  our  hazarding  a battle  with  them.  So  when  they 
had  gotten  those  that  governed  us  under  their  power  they  after- 
wards burnt  down  our  cities,  and  demolished  the  temples  of  the 
gods,  and  used  all  the  inhabitants  after  a most  barbarous  man- 
ner : nay,  some  they  slew,  and  led  their  children  and  their  wives 
into  slavery.  At  length  they  made  one  of  themselves  king, 
whose  name  was  Salatis ; he  also  lived  at  Memphis,  and  made 
both  the  upper  and  lower  regions  pay  tribute,  and  left  garrisons 
in  places  that  were  the  most  proper  for  them.” 

We  are  further  told  that  this  Salatis,  in  order  to  protect  his 


* “ Against  Apion”  (Josephus),  14,  15,  26,  27,  28. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  243 


power  from  incursions  from  the  east,  rebuilt  the  city  of  Avaris, 
which  lay  on  the  Bubastic  channel  of  the  Nile,  and  placed  in  it  a 
garrison  of  two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  armed  men.  “ ‘ This 
whole  nation  was  styled  Hycsos,  that  is,  Shepherd  Kings,  for  the 
first  syllable  Hyc,  according  to  the  sacred  dialect,  denotes  a king, 
as  is  Sos  a shepherd,  but  this  according  to  the  ordinary  dialect; 
and  of  these  is  compounded  Hycsos : but  some  say  that  these 
people  were  Arabians.’  Now,  in  another  copy  it  is  said  that  this 
word  does  not  denote  kings,  but,  on  the  contrary,  denotes  captive 
shepherds,  and  this  on  account  of  the  particle  Hyc;  for  that 
Hyc,  with  the  aspiration,  in  the  Egyptian  tongue  again  de- 
notes shepherds,  and  that  expressly  also ; and  this  to  me  seems 
the  more  probable  opinion,  and  more  agreeable  to  ancient  his- 
tory.” 

These  and  their  descendants  “ ‘ kept  possession  of  Egypt  five 
hundred  and  eleven  years.’  ” After  this  the  kings  of  Thebes 
and  other  parts  of  Egypt  made  an  insurrection  against  them, 
and  a long  war  ensued.  “ ‘ Under  a king  whose  name  was  Alis- 
phragmuthosis  the  shepherds  were  subdued  by  him,  and  were 
indeed  driven  out  of  other  parts  of  Egypt,  but  were  shut  up  in 
a place  that  contained  ten  thousand  acres : this  place  was  named 
Avaris.’  Thummosis,  the  son  of  Alisphragmuthosis,  besieged 
them  for  a long  time,  and  being  unable  to  take  the  place  by 
force,  ho  agreed  to  allow  them  to  leave  Egypt  with  their  fami- 
lies and  effects.  These  then  left  Egypt  and  went  into  Syria, 
where  they  built  a city  and  named  it  Jerusalem.” 

Josephus,  after  giving  this  account,  goes  on  to  say : “ But  now 
I shall  produce  the  Egyptians  as  witnesses  to  the  antiquity  of 
our  nation.  I shall  therefore  here  bring  in  Manetho  again,  and 
what  he  writes  as  to  the  order  of  the  times  in  this  case,  and 
thus  he  speaks : ‘ When  this  people  or  shepherds  were  gone  out 
of  Egypt  to  Jerusalem,  Tethmosis,  the  king  of  Egypt  who  drove 
them  out,  reigned  afterward  twenty -five  years  and  four  months,’  ” 
etc.  This,  and  the  following  kings  given  in  this  connection  by 
Josephus,  belong  to  the  eighteenth  dynasty.  Josephus  under- 
stands Thummosis,  the  son  of  Alisphragmuthosis,  to  be  the  same 
as  Tethmosis,  and  by  Tethmosis  he  means  one  of  the  kings  who 
bore  the  name  of  Thothmes  or  Thutmes,  and  who  reigned  in 
this  dynasty.  The  first  king  of  this  dynasty  was  not  Tethmo- 


244 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


sis,  but  by  the  table  of  Abydos  he  was  Aabmes,  thereby  confirm- 
ing the  copies  of  Africanus  and  Eusebius,  who  place  as  the  first 
king  Amos,  or  Amosis.  But  there  is  a seeming  encouragement 
to  the  statement  of  Josephus,  for  Africanus  says  Moses  went 
out  of  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Amos. 

The  Second  Story. — Josephus  prefaces  the  second  story  by 
declaring  it  to  be  an  invention  of  Manetho,  who,  after  giving 
the  first  story,  had  done  this  “in  order  to  appear  to  have  written 
what  rumors  and  reports  passed  abroad  about  the  Jews,  and 
introduces  incredible  narrations,  as  if  he  would  have  the  Egyp- 
tian multitude,  that  had  the  leprosy  and  other  distempers,  to 
have  been  mixed  with  us,  as  he  says  they  were,  and  that  they 
were  condemned  to  fly  out  of  Egypt  together,  for  he  mentions 
Amenophis,  a fictitious  king’s  name,  though  on  that  account  he 
durst  not  set  the  number  of  years  of  his  reign,  which  yet  he 
had  accurately  done  as  to  the  other  kings  mentioned ; he  then 
ascribes  certain  fabulous  stories  to  this  king,  as  having  in  a 
manner  forgotten  how  he  had  already  related  that  the  de- 
parture of  the  shepherds  for  Jerusalem  had  been  five  hundred 
and  eighteen  years  before;  for  Tethmosis  was  king  when  they 
went  away.” 

The  story,  in  substance,  is  as  follows : A certain  king,  Amen- 
ophis, desired  to  behold  the  gods.  He  consulted  one  who  had 
the  same  name,  Amenophis,  the  son  of  Papis,  who  advised  him 
to  gain  the  favor  of  the  gods  by  expelling  from  Egypt  all  lep- 
rous and  unclean  persons.  But  instead  of  this  he  sent  them 
to  the  stone-quarries.  Afterwards  the  king  granted  a request 
they  made  to  permit  them  to  occupy  the  city  of  Avaris,  which 
had  remained  desolate  since  the  departure  of  the  shepherds. 
Among  the  ostracized  ones  were  several  learned  priests  afflicted 
with  the  same  malady,  and  one  of  them,  named  Osarsiph,  a 
priest  of  Heliopolis,  they  made  their  leader.  Having  fortified 
the  city,  Osarsiph  excited  an  insurrection  against  Amenophis, 
and  sent  to  Jerusalem  to  the  formerly-expelled  shepherds  for 
aid.  They  responded  with  alacrity,  and  came  to  the  assistance 
of  Osarsiph,  whose  name  was  afterwards  changed  to  Moses. 
Amenophis  and  his  army  were  compelled  to  fly  into  Ethiopia, 
where  they  remained  thirteen  years.  During  these  thirteen 
years  the  Egyptians  were  treated  by  their  oppressors  with 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  245 

great  barbarity,  “for  they  did  not  only  set  the  cities  and  vil- 
lages on  fire,  but  were  not  satisfied  until  they  had  been  guilty 
of  sacrilege,  and  destroyed  the  images  of  the  gods,  and  used 
them  in  roasting  those  sacred  animals  that  used  to  be  wor- 
shipped, and  forced  the  priests  and  prophets  to  be  the  execu- 
tioners and  murderers  of  those  animals,  and  then  ejected  them 
naked  out  of  the  country.” 

After  the  expiration  of  thirteen  years  Amenophis  returned  to 
Egypt  with  a great  army,  and  drove  these  leprous  and  unclean 
people  and  their  allies  out  of  Egypt  to  the  bounds  of  Syria. 

Comparing  these  two  stories,  there  is  nothing  in  the  one  con- 
tradictory of  the  other.  It  is  only  as  we  adopt  the  view  of  Jo- 
sephus, that  the  facts  related  in  the  first  story  refer  to  the  Jews, 
that  such  a charge  can  be  made.  The  only  truly  Jewish  allu- 
sion made  in  it  is  that  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  but  this,  when 
examined,  fails;  for  the  Bible  in  no  place  asserts  that  the  Jews 
founded  that  city,  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  it  was  a city  of  the 
Jebusites,  smitten  and  set  on  fire  by  Judah.* 

The  Sallier  papyrus  f is  believed  by  scholars  to  describe  cer- 
tain events  which  preceded  the  era  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty. 
These  are  similar  to  some  which  form  a part  of  the  first  story. 
The  following  from  the  papyrus-roll  is  to  this  point : “ It  came 
to  pass  that  the  land  of  Kemi  belonged  to  enemies.  And  no- 
body was  lord  in  the  day  when  that  happened.  At  that  time 
there  was,  indeed,  a king  Ra-Sekenen,  but  he  was  only  a Hak 
of  the  town  of  the  south,  but  the  enemies  sat  in  the  town  of  the 
Amu,  and  there  was  a king  (Ur)  (2)  Apopi  in  the  town  of 
Auaris.  And  the  whole  world  brought  him  its  productions,  also 
the  northern  land  did  the  same  with  all  the  good  things  of  Ta- 
meri ; and  the  king  Apopi  (3)  chose  the  god  Set  for  his  divine 
master,  and  he  did  not  serve  any  of  the  gods  which  were  wor- 
shipped in  the  whole  land.”  “ There  had,  evidently,  before  this 
begun  a correspondence  between  the  tyrant  in  the  north  and 
the  Hak  in  the  southern  land,  in  which  the  first  named,  among 
other  things,  required  of  the  last  to  give  up  the  worship  of  his 
gods,  and  to  worship  Amon  Ra  alone  as  the  only  divinity  of  the 


* Judges  i.  8. 

f “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  p.  239.  Eng.  trans. 

21* 


246 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


country.  Ra-Sekenen  had  declared  himself  prepared  for  all,  but 
had  added  a proviso  to  his  letter,  in  which  he  expressly  declared, 
to  allow  him  to  speak  for  himself,  ‘that  he  was  not  able  to 
promise  to  serve  no  other  of  the  gods  which  were  worshipped  in 
the  whole  country  but  Amon  Ra,  the  king  of  the  gods,  alone.’  ” * 
This  papyrus  informs  us  of  other  matters  which  show  a strained 
condition  of  things  as  existing  between  the  two.  Of  what  the 
outcome  of  all  this  was  we  are  unfortunately  left  in  ignorance 
by  the  writer  abruptly  changing  the  narration  to  an  entirely 
different  matter.  But  the  monuments  here  render  some  assist- 
ance. There  were  several  kings  who  bore  the  name  of  Ra- 
Sekenen.  The  successor  of  the  last  of  these,  named  Karnes, 
was  the  father  of  Aahmes,  who  became  the  first  king  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty.f  The  internecine  war  raging  in  Egypt  was 
terminated  by  the  capture  of  Avaris  and  other  cities  by  Aahmes, 
and  the  whole  country  was  brought  under  his  sole  sovereign 
sway.  Dr.  Brugsch  says,  “A  strange  enigma  covers  this  age 
of  shame,  the  veil  of  which  we  are  not  yet  able  to  lift. 

“ For  had  that  hatred  been  so  universal  as  Manetho’s  picture 
of  the  conflagrations,  sacking  of  temples,  and  persecutions  of 
the  inhabitants  by  princes  of  the  foreign  hordes  gives  us  to  un- 
derstand, how  are  we  to  explain  the  strange  fact  that  these 
same  Egyptians,  not  excepting  the  college  of  priests  of  the 
Theban  Amon,  in  the  time  of  the  Hyksos  and  the  following  dy- 
nasties, could  prevail  upon  themselves  to  give  their  children 
pure  Semitic  names,  borrowed  from  the  language  of  their  heredi- 
tary enemies  ? How  could  they  themselves  offer  their  homage 
to  those  gods  of  the  strangers  who  had  done  their  land  so  much 
mischief,  even  to  the  extirpation  of  the  native  divinities  ?”  | 
This  being  the  condition  of  things,  and  if  these  so-called  for- 
eigners had  controlled  Egypt  five  hundred  and  eleven  years,  as 
Manetho  says,  they  could  claim  to  be  Egyptians.  To  charge 
them  with  being  foreigners  after  so  long  a naturalization  would 
be  the  same  as  if  one  of  the  descendants  of  the  Saxons  who 
fought  with  Harold  at  Hastings  should,  in  the  time  of  Eliza- 


* “Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  p.  240.  Eng.  trans. 
f Ibid.,  pp.  245,  246,  252,  253. 

% Ibid,  p.  254. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  247 


beth,  call  those  descended  from  the  Normans  a foreign  people, 
for  no  other  reason  than  that  they,  the  Saxons,  had  occupied 
Britain  some  five  hundred  or  more  years  before  the  Normans, 
who,  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth,  had  been  masters  of  the  land  also 
for  five  hundred  years.  IIow  can  be  explained  Manetho’s  view  ? 
It  seems  to  me  the  explanation  lies  in  the  peculiar  circumstances 
which  mark  the  history  of  this  people.  They,  thi-ougbout  their 
history,  were  subjected  to  many  dynastic  changes,  and  these 
ai’ising,  in  part,  from  a continuous  emigration  from  the  east  into 
Egypt.  We  meet  this  in  the  times  previous  to  the  eighteenth 
dynasty.  Then  the  struggle  was  between  independent  kings 
for  the  supremacy.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  the  line 
of  the  eighteenth  dj'nasty  had  any  legitimate  right  to  reign 
over  Egypt,  other  than  that  its  first  king,  Aahrnes,  had  married 
a descendant  of  the  old  line  of  kings,  and  this,  of  course,  was 
secondary  to  the  right  which  his  triumphant  arms  gave  him  to 
be  the  master.  The  eighteenth  dynasty  came  to  an  end  in  a 
period  of  confusion  of  which  there  are  extant  no  clear  historic 
details.  The  Ramessids  of  the  nineteenth  dynasty  are  believed 
to  have  been  of  Semitic  origin,  but,  by  intermarriage  with  the 
old  royal  race,  to  have  gained  the  color  of  legitimacy.  Between 
the  nineteenth  and  twentieth  dynasties  there  is  another  struggle 
between  rival  kings.  The  twentieth  dynasty  came  to  an  end 
with  the  insurrection  of  the  priestly  class  at  Thebes,  who  ap- 
pear to  have  been  of  the  same  race  or  family  as  the  kings  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty.  These  last,  the  twenty-first,  were  over- 
thrown by  the  ifival  dynasty  of  Bubastus,  by  some  claimed  to 
be  of  Semitic  origin  ; at  all  events,  of  a race  differing  from  that 
of  the  priestly  dynasty.  We  next  find  the  descendants  of  the 
priestly  class  returning  from  retirement  in  Ethiopia,  and  re- 
covering Egypt  again.  These,  in  their  turn,  are  overthrown  by 
the  Assyrians,  and  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty  uniting  by  inter- 
marriage, the  two  contending  factions  for  the  throne  continue 
in  power  until  they  are  overthrown  by  the  Persians  and  Egypt 
reduced  to  a province  of  that  empire.  Looking  at  the  history 
with  these  facts  prominent,  nothing  is  more  apparent  than  that 
during  the  last  four  hundred  years  a struggle  had  been  going 
on  between  two  factions  for  the  supremacy,  and  without  deter- 
mining which  of  these  more  nearly  represented  the  first,  or  even 


248 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


the  middle,  Egyptian  empire,  it  is  clear  that  one  of  these,  the 
Ethiopian,  was  the  representative  of  a distinct  and  aggressive 
cult.  If  we  compare  the  Sallier  papyrus  with  the  first  story,  it 
is  discovered  that  a common  spirit  pervades  both.  Not  only  is 
the  animus  the  same,  but  the  side  taken  between  the  contend- 
ing parties  by  the  two  narrators  is  the  same.  The  Sallier  pa- 
pyrus was  not  written  earlier  than  the  reign  of  Raineses  II., 
because  it  also  narrates  events  of  that  king’s  reign,  and  we  know 
not  how  much  older  than  its  author  is  the  story  ascribed  to 
Manetho.  Tbe  monuments  do  not  agree  with  either,  but  con- 
vey a condition  of  things  entirely  opposed  to  both.  Is  the  story 
of  the  Sallier  papyrus  to  be  removed  far  back  to  the  beginning 
of  the  so-called  shepherd  rule,  and  given  to  the  times  of  that 
Apophis,  mentioned  by  Josephus  as  the  fourth  king  of  that 
dynasty  of  which  Salatis  was  the  head?  If  so,  then  the  monu- 
ments show  the  inevitable  change  which  a long  occupation  of  a 
country  will  work  both  on  tbe  conquerors  and  on  the  con- 
quered, in  making  them  more  like  one  another,  and  destroying 
grave  differences  in  religion  or  civilization.  Such  an  hypothesis 
further  allows,  in  spite  of  all  softening  influence  of  time,  the 
continuance  in  a portion  of  one  of  the  contending  parties  of  a 
vindictive  and  intractable  enmity  towards  the  memory  of  the 
so-called  shepherd  rulers. 

Turning  to  later  times  than  these,  a remarkable  writing  of 
the  time  of  Rameses  III.  commands  attention.  As  understood 
by  some,  it  describes  the  condition  of  things  existing  during 
the  disturbances  which  preceded  the  twentieth  dynasty.  It  is 
found  in  what  is  known  as  the  Harris  papyrus.  A portion 
is  translated  as  follows : “ The  people  of  Egypt  lived  in  ban- 
ishment abroad.  Of  those  who  lived  in  the  interior  of  the 
land,  none  had  any  to  care  for  him.  So  passed  away  long  years, 
until  other  times  came.  The  land  of  Egypt  belonged  to  princes 
from  foreign  parts.  They  slew  one  another,  whether  noble 
or  mean.  Other  times  came  on  afterwards,  during  years  of 
scarcity.  Arisu,  a Phoenician,  had  raised  himself  among  them 
to  be  a prince,  and  he  compelled  all  the  people  to  pay  him 
tribute.  Whatever  any  had  gathered  together,  that  his  ( i.e 
the  Phoenician’s)  companions  robbed  them  of.  Thus  did  they. 
The  gods  were  treated  like  the  men.  They  went  without  the 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  249 

appointed  sin-offerings  in  the  temples.  Then  did  the  gods 
turn  this  state  of  things  to  prosperity.  They  restored  to  the 
land  its  even  balance,  such  as  its  condition  properly  required.”  * 
Rameses  III.  continues  with  an  account  of  the  establishment 
upon  the  throne  of  his  father,  King  Setnakht  Merer  Mianum. 
Dr.  Brugsch  regards  this  Arisu  or  Alius  as  the  rival  of  Setnakht 
in  the  struggle  for  the  throne.  But  is  this  necessarily  the  case? 
The  writing  begins  apparently  with  an  account  of  remote  his- 
torical matter.  The  omission  of  the  achievements  of  the  great 
kings  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties  may  be  due 
wholly  to  the  spirit  of  self-glorification  which  the  kings  of  Egypt 
indulged  to  so  great  an  extent. 

This  writing  contains  statements  similar  to  those  of  the  first 
story  of  Manetho.  This  name  Arisu  is  also  written  Alius. 
This  forms  the  chief  part  of  the  name  of  the  king  who  warred 
against  the  shepherds,  Alisphragmuthosis.  A name  of  similar 
construction  to  the  last  occurs  in  the  eighteenth  dynasty, — 
Mephramutbosis  or  Misphramuthosis.  This  name  is  rendered 
in  the  following  forms  by  Sir  I.  Gardner  Wilkinson : Mesphra- 
Thutmosis,  or  Misphra-Tummosis,  or  Thothmosis.  In  this  we 
find  a reference  to  the  name  Thummosis  given  to  the  son  of 
Alisphragmuthosis  by  Josephus.  There  seems  to  be  a confusion 
between  it  and  the  name  Thothmes  or  Thutmes.  Thummosis  is 
not  the  same  as  Thutmes.  In  the  same  papyrus  of  Rameses  III. 
the  name  of  the  god  Turn  occurs  in  such  passages  as,  “He  puri- 
fied the  exalted  royal  throne  of  Egypt,  and  so  he  was  the  ruler 
of  the  inhabitants  on  the  throne  of  the  sun-god  Turn,”  and 
“thus  was  I clothed  with  the  robes  of  state,  like  Turn.”  The 
name  of  this  god  is  also  written  Atum,  Tmu,  Tethmu.  In 
Greek  inscriptions  he  is  called  Tomos.  “ Though  principally 
worshipped  in  Lower  Egypt,  he  holds  a conspicuous  place 
amongst  the  contemplar  gods  of  Thebes.”  f His  principal  place 
of  worship  was  at  An,  or  Heliopolis.  It  was  the  practice  among 
the  ancients  to  combine  in  the  names  of  individuals  those  of 
the  gods.  If  the  name  of  Turn  or  Tethmu  be  used  in  this  way, 
we  have  Tummosis  or  Thummosis;  Tethmuosis  or  Tethmosis. 


* “Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  p.  137.  Eng.  trans. 
f “The  Ancient  Egyptians”  (Wilkinson),  vol.  iii.  p.  178. 


250 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


If  such  is  the  derivation  of  the  name  of  this  king  who  drove 
out  the  shepherds,  it  was  not  the  same  as  Aahmes  or  Thutmes. 
Thutmes  means  “Thut’s  child,”  but  the  other  appears  to  have  a 
similar  reference  to  Turn.  Since  to  the  Egyptians  the  sun  arose 
as  Horus,  and  shone  in  mid-heaven  as  Ra,  and  set  as  Turn;  and 
as  we  find  Egyptian  names  compounded  of  Horus  and  Ra,  we 
may  expect  a like  use  to  be  made  of  Turn.  The  suggestion  I 
have  made,  that  possibly  the  Alius  of  the  Hands  papyrus  is  the 
Alisphragmuthosis  of  the  first  story  of  Josephus,  puts,  the 
Harris  papyrus  in  contrast  with  the  Sallier,  and  in  addition  the 
hypothesis  implies  that  we  have  in  the  latter  (Sallier)  an  ac- 
count written  by  one  who  was  in  sympathy  with  the  side  of 
Alisphragmuthosis,  and  in  the  other  the  statement  of  him  who 
inherited  the  interests  and  animosities  of  that  king’s  adver- 
saries. 

Neither  of  these  papyri  contain  reference  to  anything  to  be 
identified  with  the  departure  of  the  Jews,  nor  do  those  portions 
of  the  first  story  which  may  be  compared  with  them.  It  is 
said  in  the  Harris  papyrus,  “ Other  times  came  on  afterwards, 
during  years  of  scarcity.  Arisu,  a Phoenician,  had  raised  him- 
self among  them  to  be  a prince,  and  he  compelled  all  the  people 
to  pay  him  tribute.  Whatever  any  had  gathered  together,  that 
his  (be.,  the  Phoenician’s)  companions  robbed  them  of.”  This 
resembles  the  story  of  the  famine  in  Egypt,  and  the  result  of  it, 
which  brought  into  the  treasure-house  of  Pharaoh  all  the  money 
of  Egypt  and  Canaan,  and  all  the  possessions  of  the  Egyptians 
of  horses,  cattle,  and  lands.  The  lands  were  relet  to  the 
Egyptians,  but  they  had  to  pay  one-fifth  part  ever  afterwards 
to  Pharaoh.  But  this  has  no  reference  to  the  subject  under 
discussion, — the  circumstances  attending  the  departure  of  the 
children  of  Israel  from  Egypt. 


THE  HYKSOS. 

Josephus  furnishes  us  with  two  different  interpretations  of 
the  word  Hyksos.  One  is  that  the  term  designated  a race 
whose  kings  were  called  shepherd  kings,  the  other  is  that  the 
word  meant  captive  shepherds. 

The  adoption  of  the  title  shepherd  as  a royal  one  is  instanced 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  251 

in  the  case  of  the  early  Chaldeans.  Aloros,  of  Babylon,  an 
antediluvian  king,  adopted  this  mode  of  designating  his  kingly 
office.  “ Aloros  took  the  title  of  1 shepherd,’  a title  which  we 
find  assumed  by  the  early  Chaldean  princes.”* 

The  Hyksos  are  generally  believed  to  have  belonged  to  the 
nation  of  the  Menti,  or  natives  of  Syria.  Dr.  Brugsch  explains 
the  term  by  which  they  were  designated  by  Josephus  in  the 
following  language:  “If  the  kind  reader  will  now  recall  to  his 
thoughts  what  we  have  said  about  the  Arab  Bedouins,  who  in- 
habited the  desert  to  the  east  of  Egypt,  and  were  called  in 
Egyptian  Shasu  (also  Shasa,  Shaus,  Shauas),  he  will  certainly 
be  of  the  same  opinion  as  ourselves,  that  those  who  maintain 
the  Arab  origin  of  the  Hyksos  must  have  drawn  their  informa- 
tion from  a pure  Egyptian  source,  for  that  word  Sos  answers 
completely  to  the  old  Egyptian  Shasu,  in  which  the  sound  sh, 
which  did  not  exist  in  Greek,  according  to  usage,  was  replaced 
by  a simple  s.  Although  Manetho,  when  he  talks  of  the 
Hyksos,  insists  upon  the  meaning  of  shepherd,  he  could  only  do 
this  in  consequence  of  a strange  confusion,  since  he  turns  to  the 
new  and  popular  language  of  his  own  time  to  explain  the 
second  syllable  sos,  in  which,  accidentally,  sos  (or  shos,  as  the 
same  word  is  still  pronounced  in  Coptic)  means  a shepherd.”  f 
In  another  place  this  writer  says,  “We  will  not,  however,  on 
the  other  hand,  maintain  that  the  appellation  Hale  Shaus  is  the 
same  which  the  bearers  of  it,  of  whatever  descent  they  might 
boast,  either  formed  of  their  own  accord  for  themselves  or 
assumed  on  account  of  their  office.  It  is  far  more  probable  that 
the  Egyptians,  when  at  last  they  drove  away  their  tyrants  of 
Semitic  blood,  gave  these  princes,  who  for  several  centuries  had 
considered  themselves  as  the  legitimate  kings  of  Egypt,  the 
nickname  of  Hak  Shasu  by  way  of  a contemptuous  expres- 
sion.” J 

The  term  Cush  became  in  later  times  interchangeable  with 
that  of  Ethiopia.  It  was  of  very  extensive  application,  and 
was  bestowed  upon  the  homes  of  black-skinned  peoples,  whether 


* “ The  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East”  (Sayce),  p.  106. 
t “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  pp.  229,  230.  Eng.  trans. 
J Ibid.,  p.  232. 


252 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


they  were  negroes  or  not.  It  belonged  generally  to  the  country 
between  the  Oxus  and  the  Ganges,  extending  to  the  coast.  It 
also  included  Arabia,  Egypt,  and  Nubia.  In  still  later  times  the 
name  Ethiopia  is  more  confined.  African  Ethiopia  was  to  the 
south  of  Egypt  proper;  Asiatic  Ethiopia  “the  tract  intervening 
between  Eastern  Persia  and  the  mouth  of  the  Indus.”*  Among 
several  of  the  more  important  nations  or  peoples  occupying 
these  sections  of  Asia  and  Africa  there  appears  to  have  been  a 
common  love  and  reverence  for  the  horse.  It  exists  to  a re- 
markable degree  at  this  day  among  the  descendants  of  those 
whom  Dr.  Brugsch  identifies  as  the  Shasu  or  Arab  Bedouins 
In  the  reign  of  Thutmes  I.  the  horse  first  appears  on  the  monu- 
ments under  his  Semitic  name  Sus.  “ In  the  tomb  of  the  noble 
Pahir,  the  son  of  the  brave  ‘ warrior’  Aahmes,  at  El-Kab,  there 
appears,  among  numerous  representations  of  common  life,  a 
picture  of  a pair  of  horses  with  a chariot.  The  coachman, 
designated  by  the  Semitic  name  Kasan,  stands  behind  the 
chariot,  holds  tight  the  reins  of  the  horses,  in  expectation  of 
his  lord,  ‘ who  loves  the  clever  horses.’  ” f I propose  to  interpret 
the  term  Hyksos  by  this  word  sus. 

The  relationship  of  the  kings  of  the  eighteenth  to  the  priestly 
dynasty  is  beyond  dispute.  These  latter,  after  wresting  the 
power  from  the  Ramessids  of  the  twentieth  dynasty,  were  in 
their  turn  subjected  to  a like  treatment  at  the  hands  of  Shes- 
hank,  of  the  twenty-second  dynasty.  “It  was  during  this 
period  of  internal  dissension,”  according  to  Mr.  Sayce,J  “that 
the  bodies  of  Thutmes  III.,  of  Rameses  II.,  and  of  the  other 
great  princes  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties,  were 
transferred  from  their  tombs  to  the  secret  cavern  near  Deir-el- 
Bahari,  at  Thebes,  where  they  were  interred  along  with  the 
members  of  the  family  of  Pinotem,”  one  of  this  priestly  class. 
Amenhotep  III.,  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  had  ei’ected  at 
Mount  Barkel,  in  Ethiopia,  a temple  fortress,  or  fortified  sanct- 
uary, for  the  god  Amon,  of  Thebes.  § Thither  this  priestly 


* “ Herodotus”  (Rawlinson),  vol.  i.,  Essay  xi.  and  note,  p.  529. 

| “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  p.  295.  Eng.  trans. 
J “ The  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East”  (Sayce),  p.  50. 

\ “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  p.  226.  Eng.  trans. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  253 


dynasty  retired  when  Sheshank  drove  them  from  the  throne, 
and  there  established  the  kingdom  of  Napata,  and  styled  them- 
selves kings  of  the  land  of  Cush.  With  the  twenty-fifth  dy- 
nasty the  Ethiopians  are  again  in  supremacy.  Previous  to  this 
the  king,  Piankhi  Miamun,  had  asserted  his  power  over  Egypt, 
but  it  was  short-lived,  for  his  son  Miamun  Nut’s  authority  did 
not  extend  farther  north  than  Thebes.*  In  this  portion  of 
Egyptian  history  we  are  brought  face  to  face  with  two  contend- 
ing factions.  On  one  side  are  the  Ethiopians,  on  the  other  a 
“mixed  multitude”  of  princes,  satraps,  and  kings,  some  subor- 
dinate and  some  aspiring  to  become  paramount,  but  with  no 
fixed  dynastic  permanence.  We  turn  to  the  inscription  of 
Piankhi  and  learn  in  what  light  he  looked  upon  his  opponents. 

The  following  extract  follows  the  paragraph  which  informs  of 
his  final  triumph  : 

“ When  the  earth  grew  light,  in  the  morning,  very  early,  there 
came  the  two  kings  of  the  South  and  two  kings  of  the  North, 
with  their  royal  serpent-diadems,  to  worship  before  the  presence 
of  his  Majesty.  With  them  also  the  kings  of  Upper  Egypt  and 
the  princes  of  Lower  Egypt,  who  came  to  behold  the  grace  of 
his  Majesty.  Their  legs  were  the  legs  of  women.  They  did 
not  enter  the  king’s  house,  because  they  were  unclean,  and 
besides,  they  ate  fish,  which  is  an  abomination  to  the  king.  But 
as  for  King  Nimrod,  he  went  into  the  king’s  house,  because  he 
was  clean  and  ate  no  fish.  They  stood  there  upon  their  legs, 
every  one  at  the  entrance  of  the  king’s  house.”f 

The  point  I wish  to  make  is  that  the  word  Ilyksos,  whether 
as  a term  of  reproach  or  not,  must  be  judged  from  the  stand-point 
of  the  enemies  of  the  Ethiopian  kings  and  applied  as  they  would 
apply  it.  I turn  again  to  the  inscription  of  Piankhi.  It  will 
be  remembered  that  between  Nimrod,  king  of  Hermopolis 
Magna,  and  Piankhi  there  was  a bond  of  union.  He  alone  of 
all  the  conquered  princes  enters  the  king’s  house.  When  Her- 
mopolis Magna  surrendered,  Nimrod,  after  prostrating  himself 
before  Piankhi  and  making  his  submission,  offers  his  peace-offer- 
ings of  “silver,  gold,  blue  and  green  stones,  iron,  and  many 
jewels.”  Nimrod  himself  leads  “forward  a horse  with  his  right 

* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  p.  248.  Eng.  trans. 

f Ibid.,  p.  247. 


254 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


hand;  in  his  left  was  a sistrum,  and  the  striking-plate  was  of 
gold  and  blue  stones.”*  Later  on,  when  Piankhi  visits  the 
stables  of  Nimrod,  he  speaks  in  the  inscription  as  follows: 
“When  his  Majesty  visited  the  stables  and  the  studs  of  foals  he 
observed  that  [they  had]  let  them  starve.  He  said : ‘ I swear 
as  surely  as  the  youthful  sun-god  Ka  loves  me,  as  surely  as  I 
breathe  in  life,  it  is  a viler  thing  to  my  heart  to  let  the  horses 
starve  than  all  the  other  faults  that  thou  hast  committed.  That 
thou  hast  laid  thy  heart  bare  through  this,  evidence  is  furnished 
me  of  thy  habitual  views.  Hast  thou  forgotten  that  the 
shadow  of  a god  rests  upon  me?  The  proof  thereof  shall  not 
be  wanting  to  him  on  my  part!  Would  that  another  had  done 
such  a thing  to  me,  an  ignorant  man,  not  a haughty  one,  as  he  is  I 
I was  born  out  of  my  mother’s  womb,  and  created  out  of  the 
egg  of  a divine  essence.  I was  begotten  by  a god.  By  his 
name ! I will  not  forget  him  in  what  he  has  commanded  me  to 
do.’  Then  he  had  his  (Nimrod’s)  possessions  assigned  to  the 
treasury,  and  his  granaries  to  the  property  of  the  god  Amon  of 
Api.”  f The  evidence  that  the  cult  of  the  horse  belonged  to  the 
Ethiopian  may  be  derived  from  a variety  of  sources.  “ Accord- 
ing to  Diodorus  and  Cephalion,  the  Trojan  war  took  place 
during  the  reign  of  Teutamus,  the  successor  of  Mithras;  Priam 
was  a satrap  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  and  sent  to  Teutamus  for 
assistance  after  the  death  of  Hector.”  “Syncellus  states  that 
Babius,  otherwise  Teutamus,  or  Tautanes,  the  second,  called  by 
the  Greeks  Tithonus,  a later  king,  sent  his  son  Memnon  to  the 
assistance  of  Priam.”  “ Susa  was  likewise  denominated  the 
Memnonian  city,  and  its  acropolis  and  palace  were  called  after 
Memnon’s  name.”  J Most  of  these  names  are  found  in  connec- 
tion with  the  eighteenth  dynasty.  As  the  sitting  statue  of 
Amenhotep  III.  was  the  vocal  Memnon  of  Grecian  story,  we 
may  infer  that  Teutamus,  or  Tautamus,  and  Babius  are  so  many 
variants  of  Thutmes  and  Baba,  names  which  are  found  on  the 
monuments  in  connection  with  the  eighteenth  dynasty.  The 
connection  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  with  the  royal  line  of 

* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  p.  237.  Eng.  trans. 

f Ibid.,  p.  238. 

J “ Historical  Survey  of  the  Astronomy  of  the  Ancients”  (Lewis) ; Herod- 
otus (Rawlinson),  note  to  c.  liv.,  Book  Y. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  255 

Susiana  is  further  suggested  by  its  connection  with  the  priestly 
dynasty,  and  through  it  with  the  twenty-fifth  dynasty,  known 
as  the  Ethiopian  ; the  name  of  a king  of  the  latter,  variously 
written  as  Tarcus,  Tirhakah,  Taaharaqa,  Tarquu,  is  found  on  an 
inscribed  brick  at  Susa  in  the  form  of  Tirkhak.  “This  latter 
name  is  identical  with  that  of  the  Ethiopian  king,  Tirhakah, 
mentioned  in  Scripture  (II.  Kings  xix.  9).  It  may  be  further 
noticed  that  this  title  Khak,  common  to  the  Susian  and  Ethio- 
pian kings,  is  not  improbably  the  same  term,  ox  or  ax,  which 
Josephus  states,  on  the  authority  of  Manetho,  to  signify  “ a king” 
in  the  sacred  language  of  Egypt  (conti’a  Apionem,  lib.  i.).  It 
can  hardly  be  doubted  also  that  the  xayav  or  Khakan  of  the 
Turkish  nations  is  derived  from  the  same  root.”*  In  the  same 
connection  I may  cite  another  note  from  the  same  work  (see 
Colonel  Rawlinson’s  “ Notes  on  the  Early  History  of  Babylonia,” 
p.  30,  note  2)  : Astyages  is  Aj-dahak,  “ the  biting  snake Deioccs 
is  Dahak,  “the  biting.”  It  may  be  noticed  here  that  the  name 
Apopi  of  the  Sallier  papyrus,  which  is  the  name  of  a king  in  the 
so-called  shepherd  dynasty,  according  to  the  copyists  of  Mane- 
tbo,  Aphobis  or  Apophis,  occurs  in  the  form  of  Apap,  “the  great 
serpent.”  In  keeping  with  the  expectation,  the  horse  takes 
prominence.  The  beads  and  forelegs  of  horses  form  the  capi- 
tals of  the  pillars  of  the  great  palace  at  Susa.  In  the  legend  of 
Troy  the  horse  plays  an  important  part  in  the  fortunes  and  des- 
tiny of  that  city.  Taking  the  cult  of  the  horse  as  a postulate, 
we  can  understand  why  the  Greeks  adopted  the  peculiar  strata- 
gem by  which  Troy  was  taken.  Another  instance  are  the  sacred 
horses  accompanying  the  army  of  Cyrus.  Herodotus,  describing 
the  different  nations  composing  the  army  of  Xerxes,  says,  “ The 
Arabians  and  Ethiopians  who  came  from  the  region  above 
Egypt  were  commanded  by  Arsames.  . . . The  Eastern  Ethio- 
pians— for  two  nations  of  this  name  served  in  the  army — were 
marshalled  with  the  Indians.  They  differed  in  nothing  from 
the  other  Ethiopians  save  in  their  language  and  character  of 
their  hair,  while  they  of  Lybya  are  more  woolly-haired  than 
any  other  people  in  the  world.  The  equipment  was  in  most 
points  like  that  of  the  Indians,  but  they  wore  upon  their  heads 


* Herodotus  (Rawlinson),  App.,  Book  I.,  Essay  VI.,  note  5,  p.  348. 


256 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


the  scalps  of  horses,  with  the  ears  and  mane  attached ; the  ears 
were  made  to  stand  upright  and  the  mane  served  as  a crest.”  * 
The  joining  the  Indians  with  the  Ethiopians  recalls  the  place 
the  horse  held  in  the  doctrine  of  metempsychosis  as  held  by 
them,  and,  if  no  better  reason  can  be  given,  may  account  for  the 
very  strong  language  Piankhi  uses  when  speaking  of  the  bad 
treatment  Nimrod’s  horses  had  received.  Circumstances  of  this 
kind  may  be  multiplied ; they  are  in  themselves,  separately 
considered,  of  no  particular  importance,  but  taken  together  they 
all  have  one  common  drift. 

The  second  story  of  Josephus,  in  those  things  which  it  relates 
of  Amenophis,  points  in  a still  more  unmistakable  manner  to 
Piankhi.  We  begin  with  the  following:  “The  king  was  desir- 
ous to  become  a spectator  of  the  gods,  as  had  Orus,  one  of  his 
predecessors  in  that  kingdon,  desired  the  same  before  him.” 

This  Josephus  ridicules:  “What  gods,  I pray,  did  he  desire 
to  see?  Had  he  not  already  beheld  the  ox,  the  goat,  the  croco- 
dile, and  the  baboon  ordained  by  law  to  be  worshipped,  and 
how  could  he  behold  the  heavenly  gods,  and  why  would  he  de- 
sire it?”  The  inscription  of  Piankhi  throws  some  light  upon 
this  matter.  But,  before  we  refer  to  that,  we  would  like  to 
make  a quotation  from  an  inscription  of  Horemhib,  the  Horus 
of  Manetho:  “In  the  third  year,  under  the  reign  of  the  king 
of  Egypt,  Horemhib,  his  Holiness  showed  himself  comparably 
to  the  sun-god  Ba,  in  his  own  sepulchre,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  an  offering  of  bread  to  his  father,  Amon.  As  he  came 
out  from  the  Golden  Chamber,  cries  of  joy  sounded  through  the 
whole  region,  and  the  shout  rose  up  heavenward.”  f Piankhi 
Miamun  also  desired  “to  become  a spectator  of  the  gods.”  His 
inscription  relates : “ ^Returning  and  on  his  way  to  the  temple 
of  the  Sun,  he  was  greeted  most  warmly  by  the  overseer  of  the 
house  of  the  god,  and  the  leader  of  the  prayers  pronounced  the 
formula  ‘of  the  keeping  away  of  evil  spirits  from  the  king.’ 
The  arrangement  of  the  house  of  stars  was  completed,  the  fillets 
were  put  on,  he  was  purified  with  balsam  and  holy  water,  and 
the  flowers  were  presented  to  him  for  the  house  of  the  obelisk 


* Herodotus  (Rawlinson),  Book  VII.  70. 

f “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  p.  472.  Eng.  trans. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  257 

(Ha-benben).  He  took  the  flowers,  ascended  the  stairs  to  the 
great  window  to  look  upon  the  sun-god,  Ra,  in  the  house  of  the 
obelisk.  Thus  the  king  himself  stood  there.  The  prince  was 
alone.  He  drew  back  the  bolt  and  opened  the  doors,  and  beheld 
his  father,  Ra,  in  the  exalted  house  of  the  obelisk,  and  the 
morning  bark  of  Ra  and  the  evening  bark  of  Turn.  The  doors 
were  (then)  shut,  the  sealing-clay  was  laid  on,  and  the  king 
himself  impressed  his  seal.  He  commanded  the  priests  (as 
follows):  ‘I  have  satisfied  myself  of  the  secure  closing;  none 
other  of  all  the  kings  shall  enter  more.’  As  he  stood  there,  they 
threw  themselves  prostrate  before  his  Majesty,  while  they  spake 
thus:  ‘May  Horus,  the  friend  of  the  city  of  On,  endure  and  in- 
crease and  never  vanish  away!’”*  The  term  Horus  is  con- 
tinually applied  to  Piankhi  in  this  inscription.  The  people  of 
Hermopolis  sing,  “ Beautiful  is  Horus,  who  abides  in  his  city, 
the  son  of  the  sun  Piankhi.”  When  the  prince  Paf-tot-bast,  of 
Heracleopolis  Magna,  makes  his  submission,  he  prostrates  himself 
before  his  Majesty  and  cries,  “ Hail  to  thee,  Horus,  mighty  king ! 
Bull  that  wardest  off  the  Bulls.  The  abyss  has  swallowed  me 
up;  I am  sunk  in  darkness;  give  me  light  for  my  countenance.” 

“He  (Amenophis)  might  see  the  gods  if  he  would  clear  the 
whole  country  of  the  lepers  and  other  impure  people.” 

This  is  applied  to  the  Jews  with  little  or  no  reason  to  sup- 
port it.  The  presence  in  Egypt  of  a Canaanitish  people  will 
account  for  the  disease  of  leprosy  being  there,  Avithout  making 
the  Jews  the  particular  sufferers  from  the  malady.  The  Jews 
at  their  departure  were  exposed  to  contagion  from  the  disease, 
and  some  of  their  number  were  its  victims.  The  evil  was 
great  enough  to  cause  Moses  to  insert  in  his  code  laws  to 
restrain  its  spread  among  the  people  by  the  rigid  exclusion 
of  the  unfortunate  victims  of  the  dreaded  disease.  But  a 
gloss  is  put  upon  the  Avords  leprous  and  impure  (unclean), 
as  if  they  Avere  synonymous, — that  is,  that  the  unclean  were 
all  lepers.  Unclean  or  impure,  as  used  by  religious  purists,  is 
a stigma  put  upon  things  and  practices  Avhich  are  forbidden  by 
the  sacred  law.  This  characterization  of  things  as  clean  and 
unclean  was  not  uncommon  among  the  ancients.  Nations 


* “Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  ii.  p.  243.  Eng.  trans. 

22* 


258 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


which  have  different  laws  as  to  what  is  clean  and  unclean  are 
unclean  to  each  othei*,  for,  according  to  the  law,  the  eating  of 
an  unclean  thing  makes  the  eater  unclean  also.  The  inscription 
of  Piankhi  curiously  illustrates  this  point:  “With  them  also 
the  kings  of  Upper  Egypt  and  the  princes  of  Lower  Egypt, 
who  came  to  behold  the  grace  of  his  Majesty.  . . . They  did 
not  enter  the  king’s  house,  because  they  were  unclean,  and  be- 
sides, they  ate  fish,  which  is  an  abomination  to  the  king.”  If  I 
mistake  not,  there  is  an  allusion  here  to  the  death  of  Osiris. 

It  will  be  now  seen  that  most  of  the  events  related  in  the 
second  story  of  Manetho  are  not  only  characteristic  of  the  times 
of  Piankhi,  about  b.c.  738,  but  a series  of  like  ones  transpire. 
Other  resemblances  occur  with  still  later  history,  but  I turn  to 
another  story  connected  with  the  departure  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  which  places  it  at  about  this  time. 

It  is  the  story  of  Lysimachus,  which  Josephus  also  gives. 
The  same  is  repeated  by  Tacitus,  but  with  a few  variations.* 
It  is  much  in  the  same  vein  as  story  number  two  of  Manetho. 
I notice  it  because  Bocchoris  is  made  the  Pharaoh  of  the  exo- 
dus. The  chief  opponent  of  Piankhi  was  Tafnakhth  of  Sais, — 
this  prince  is  called  Tnephachthus  by  Diodorus,  who  also  calls 
his  son  Bocchoris.  According  to  the  copyists  of  Manetho,  Boc- 
choris was  the  sole  king  of  the  twenty-fourth  dynasty.  The 
name  of  this  King  has  been  identified  on  the  monuments  as  Bak- 
en-ran-ef.  Notwithstanding  this,  it  is  not  impossible  that  the 
name  of  Bocchoris  is  a corruption  of  two  names  which  are  given 
to  Piankhi ; the  similarity  between  the  corrupted  names  and 
that  of  Bak-en-ran-ef  leading  to  the  ascription  to  him  of  deeds 
which  properly  belonged  to  Piankhi,  he  thereby  becoming  the 
Pharaoh  of  a spurious  exodus  of  the  Jews  from  Egypt. 

The  hypothesis  of  the  transmutation  of  Piankhi’s  names  is, 
this  king  is  continually  addressed  in  the  inscription  as  Horus,  as 
if  the  appellation  fitted  him  in  some  especial  way.  Piankhi  is 
also  written  Pionkhi.  Pionkhi  in  combination  with  Horus,  also 
written  Oros,  becomes  Pionkh-orus,  and  abbreviated  with  an 
interchange  of  P with  B and  K with  C,  we  obtain  Bocchorus. 

The  following  table  is  made  to  give  an  exhibition  of  the  dy- 


* Tacitus,  Book  Y.  c.  iii. 


“ Against  Apion”  (Josephus),  Book  I.  34. 


EXODUS  OF  THE  CHILDREN  OF  ISRAEL  FROM  EGYPT.  259 


nasties  reigning  at  about  the  time  of  the  stories  of  the  exodus, 
according  to  Josephus  and  Lysimachus,  and  from  their  study 
we  may  draw  some  conclusions  detrimental  to  the  present  con- 
dition of  Manetho’s  numbers.  The  eighteenth  dynasty,  for  its 
first  nine  kings,  is  compared  with  the  twenty-second,  twenty- 
third,  and  twenty-fourth  dynasties. 


Twenty-second  Dynasty. 

Eighteenth  Dynasty. 

Africanus. 

Eusebius. 

Josephus. 

Africanus. 

Eusebius. 

1.  Sesonchis 

21 

Sesonchusis 

21 

2.  Osorthou 

3.  Three 

16 

Osorthos 

15 

4.  Unnamed  > 

5.  Kings  J 

26 

Omitted. 

1.  Tethmosis 

25.4 

Amos  0 

Amosis  26 

6.  Tacelothis 

13 

Tacellothis 

13 

2.  Chebron 

13 

Chebros  13 

Chebron  13 

3.  Ameno-  'l 

Amen- 

7.  Three  ^ 

8.  Unnamed  V 

9.  Kings  J 

42 

Omitted. 

phis  20.7 

-(42.4) 

ophtbis  24 

Auiophis  21 

4.  Amesses  21.9  J 

Amersis  22 

Omitted. 

Twenty-third 

Dynasty. 

L.  Petoubates 

40 

Petubastis  25  y 

5.  Misa- 

Misa- 

phris  12.9 

phris  13 

Miphris  12 

-34 

6.  Misphrag- 

-(33.7) 

Misphrag- 

Misphrag- 

muthosis 

matho- 

mutho- 

2.  Osorcho 

8 

Osorthon  9 J 

25.10  or 

sis  26 

sis  26 

20.10 

3.  Psammus 

10 

Psammus 

10 

7.  Tethmosis 

9.8 

Tuthmo- 

sis  9 

Tutbmosis  9 

4.  Zet(34  or)  31' 

8.  Amenophis 

30.10 

Ameno- 

Am6n6- 

pliis  31 

phis  31 

Twenty-fourth 

Dynasty. 

-(37) 

Omitted. 

1.  Bocchoris  6 

9.  Orus 

36.5 

Horus  37 

Orus  37 

The  coincidences  of  figures  between  the  twenty-second, 
twenty-third,  and  twenty-fourth  dynasties  and  the  eighteenth, 
considered  in  connection  with  the  subject  we  have  just  been 
discussing,  is  worthy  of  attention.  When  Africanus  and  Euse- 
bius differ  in  the  twenty-second  dynasty,  the  omissions  of  Euse- 
bius find  corresponding  omissions  in  the  eighteenth  dynasty. 
Eusebius  omits  the  unnamed  kings  3,  4,  and  5 in  the  twenty- 
second,  and  Africanus,  while  placing  them,  omits  twenty-five 
years  in  the  eighteenth,  setting  down  his  first  king,  Amos, 
without  any  years,  while  Eusebius  and  Josephus  give  him 


260 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


twenty-five.  In  the  twenty-second  next  follows  Tacelothis  with 
thirteen  years;  corresponding  to  him  we  have  Chebron  or 
Chebros  with  thirteen  in  the  eighteenth.  Following  Tacelothis 
are  three  more  unnamed  kings,  reigning  forty-two  years;  cor- 
responding to  these  in  the  eighteenth,  according  to  Josephus, 
are  Amenophis  and  Amesses,  reigning  in  all  forty-two  years  and 
four  months.  Eusebius  omits  these  three  (7,  8,  9)  in  the  twenty- 
second,  and  Amesses  in  the  eighteenth,  and  gives  Amenophis 
(eighteenth)  twenty-one  years,  or  one-half  of  the  years  Africanus 
gives  to  kings  7,  8,  9 in  the  twenty-second  dynasty.  The  other 
small  differences  between  Josephus,  Africanus,  and  Eusebius  are 
accounted  for  by  the  irregular  way  in  which  the  excess  or  de- 
ficiency, caused  by  the  omission  or  counting  in  of  the  portions 
of  years,  was  corrected. 

Misphragmuthosis,  the  sixth  king  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty, 
is  put  down  as  reigning  twenty-five  years  and  ten  months,  or 
twenty  years  and  ten  months ; the  latter  figures  are  those  of  The- 
ophilus.  Theophilus  makes  Misaphris  and  Misphragmuthosis 
reign  in  all  thirty-three  years  and  seven  months,  which  closely 
corresponds  with  the  thirty-four  years  Petou bates  and  Osorcho 
reign  in  the  twenty-third  dynasty,  according  to  Eusebius.  The 
other  resemblances  are  so  marked  that  they  need  no  comment. 
The  table  brings  Bocchoris  on  a line  with  Horus.  The  connection 
between  Piankhi  and  Horus  in  the  inscription  I have  so  often 
quoted  is  so  close  that  were  its  facts  handed  down  by  tradition 
their  separate  identity  as  rulers  might  be  destroyed. 

It  is  not  proposed  to  decide  between  the  eighteenth  dynasty 
and  the  twenty-second,  twenty-third,  and  twenty-fourth  dynas- 
ties as  to  which  belong  the  regnal  years  which  are  in  dispute. 
Some  monumental  or  contemporaneous  authority  is  necessary 
to  decide  any  questions  of  this  kind.  My  aim  has  been  to  ac- 
count for  the  two  stories  of  Manetho  by  showing  how  all  the 
principal  incidents  which  compose  them  may  be  found  scattered 
through  a period  of  seven  centuries.  Partisan  hate  has  had  a 
great  deal  to  do  with  their  formation,  and  tradition  has  wrought 
much  confusion  with  its  inherent  uncertainty.  Tradition  is  like 
variegated  marble.  Dissimilar  forms  and  colors  enter  into  its 
composition,  from  what  distant  places  brought  we  may  not  dis- 
cover; but  we  know  that  it  is  a beautiful  stone  that  will  take  a 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


261 


very  fine  polish.  Concerning  the  exodus  of  the  children  of 
Israel  as  a fact,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Manetho  acknowledges 
this  in  his  efforts  to  put  it  in  its  historic  place.  The  failure  of 
the  moderns  to  find  any  express  mention  of  that  event  upon 
the  monuments  is  perhaps  traceable  to  the  fact  that  it  is  too 
remote  to  escape  destruction,  provided  it  was  of  a nature  the 
Egyptians  would  care  to  preserve  in  the  same  manner  as  they 
strove  to  keep  green  the  glorious  memories  of  the  achievements 
of  their  great  kings. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

THE  CHRONOLOGY  OP  COINS. 

The  chronological  value  of  ancient  coins  has  long  been  recog- 
nized. A coin  of  Antoninus  Pius  illustrates  this.  One  of  his 
sixth  year  has  “ the  remarkable  word  AION,  the  age  or  period, 
and  an  ibis  with  a glory  of  rays  round  its  head,  meant  for  the 
bird  phoenix.”*  The  reign  of  Antoninus,  following  the  techni- 
cality of  the  canon,  began  in  b.c.  137,  with  the  1st  of  Tboth 
concurrent  with  July  17  (adjustment  produced  by  statement 
of  Timocharis).  His  sixth  year  began  in  b.c.  142,  and  was  still 
current  when  Sirius  rose  on  the  15th  of  July,  and  day  of  full 
moon,  concurrent  with  the  fifth  intercalary  day,  b.c.  143 ; or, 
regarding  the  sixth  year  as  denoting  completed  years,  the  date 
of  the  coin  being  the  current  seventh  year,  which  began  the 
next  day,  on  the  1st  of  Thoth  (July  16).  This  subject  has 
already  been  discussed  in  the  chapter  on  the  Sothic  cycle.  I 
have  at  hand  no  means  by  which  to  test  the  accuracy  of  the 
copies  of  the  coins  of  the  Ptolemies  which  Dr.  Sharpe  furnishes 
in  his  “ History  of  Egypt.”  In  all  important  details  I presume 
they  are  correct.  Nevertheless,  the  circumstances  which  I shall 
endeavor  to  trace  are  in  no  way  dependent  upon  them,  but  serve 
only  as  a means  of  interpretation.  The  representations  upon 
these  coins  are  natural,  symbolical,  and  enigmatical.  The  an- 


* “History  of  Egypt”  (Samuel  Sharpe),  xv.  (32). 


262 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


cients  were  disposed  to  present  certain  subjects  in  disguise.  This 
is  particularly  true  of  the  measurement  of  time.  On  the  coins 
of  the  Ptolemies  are  found  as  symbols  of  the  year  the  palm- 
branch  and  the  circle.  The  palm-branch  and  the  circle  belong 
to  the  hieroglyph  of  the  vague  year.  The  circles  represent  both 
years  and  cycles  of  years.  Cycles,  or  periods  of  years,  were 
also  represented  by  the  cornucopia.  In  the  computations  of 
years  Greek  letters  are  used  as  numerals,  both  in  the  ordinary 
way  and  in  an  enigmatical  manner.  By  means  of  the  canon  of 
Ptolemy  and  the  years  of  eras  and  the  symbols  on  the  coins 
the  epochs  of  the  coins  can  in  some  cases  be  fixed,  and  by  this 
means  are  determined  the  meanings  of  certain  groups  of  letters 
which,  by  analogy,  are  presumed  to  denote  years.  A compari- 
son of  the  coins  to  be  examined  indicates  some  rules  governing 
the  numerical  value  of  these  letters.  The  rule  followed  seems 
to  have  been  that  when  there  were  four  or  a less  number  of  let- 
ters they  had  the  order  of  (4)  thousands,  (3)  hundreds,  (2)  tens, 
(1)  units.  The  letters  chosen  to  occupy  these  places  are  taken 
from  the  different  orders,  and  they  always  keep  a unit  denomi- 
nation, and  their  decimal  value  is  determined  by  their  places. 
For  example,  the  letters  NI  denote  respectively  50  and  10,  their 
unit  denominations  are  5 and  1,  and,  read  from  right  to  left,  they 
denote  15.  There  seems  to  have  been  a preference  for  these 
numbers  to  be  of  the  same  order,  and  one  not  lower  than  10, — 
that  is,  for  10  to  denote  1.  This  was,  perhaps,  sometimes  subject 
to  a purpose  to  represent  in  one  combination  several  things. 
For  example,  4/774  may  denote  years  33,  and  the  unit  mark, 
I1A  (Paphos,  Cyprus),  where  it  was  coined;  774  may  also  denote 
81  years  of  an  era,  and  the  whole  3381,  the  years  of  another 
era.  Generally  the  letters  on  the  right  and  base  of  the  coin  are 
read  from  right  to  left,  and  those  on  the  left  and  top  from  left 
to  right ; but  this  is  not  always  followed ; sometimes  another 
direction  is  indicated  by  the  symbolism  of  the  coin. 

COINS  OF  PHILOPATOR  AND  ARSINOE. 

I have  claimed  that  the  Egyptians,  in  b.c.  237,  began  a luni- 
solar  cycle  of  thirty -three  years,  which  received  an  intercalary 
year  of  twelve  lunar  months  at  the  end  of  the  cycle.  The  cycle 
was  to  take  the  place  of  the  lunar  cycle  of  twenty-five  years, 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


263 


adapted  to  the  vague  year,  that  year  at  this  time  losing  that 
character  and  becoming  one  like  the  Julian.  The  Egyptians,  in 
preferring  thirty-three  years  for  the  term  of  the  cycle,  were 
possibly  moved  that  way  because  this  number  of  years  equalled 
exactly  three  cycles  of  eleven  years.  This  implies  that  a cycle 
of  eleven  years  was  also  made  to  begin  in  b.c.  237.  The  series 
of  cycles  of  eleven  years  described  in  connection  with  the  rise 
of  Sirius,  in  the  reign  of  Takelath  II.,  are  reckoned  from  b.c. 
1318,  when  Sirius  rose  on  the  16th  of  July,  and  day  of  full  moon. 
A cycle  of  this  series  began  in  b.c.  240.  This  cycle  was  adapted 
to  the  vague  year,  and  denoted  the  advance  of  the  lunar  dates 
one  day.  The  cycle  of  eleven  years  required  by  the  Canopic 
year,  and  the  luni-solar  cycle  of  thirty-three  years  is  one 
adapted  to  the  solar  year  as  distinguished  from  the  vague  year. 
The  number  of  years  is  not  changed,  but  the  signification, — that 


is,  that  as  they,  with  the  vague  year,  denoted  the  advance  of  the 
lunar  dates  one  day,  they  now,  with  the  solar  year,  show  their 
falling  back  one  day.  Dr.  Sharpe  gives  a copy  of  a coin  of  Ar- 
sinoe, the  consort  of  Philopator.  The  obverse  bears  the  por- 
trait of  Arsinoe,  partly  encircling  which  are  thirty-three  circles 
or  beads,  and  on  the  neck  of  Arsinoe  is  a necklace  which  shows 
sixteen  of  these  beads  or  circles.  The  reverse,  among  other 
symbols,  bears  the  letters  A/,  which,  read  from  right  to  left, 
denote  singly  10  and  50,  and,  according  to  the  rule  laid  down  for 
the  reading  of  these,  they  represent  the  number  15.  The  coin 
is  of  a date  of  the  fifteenth  year  of  Philopator,  and  in  that  por- 
tion of  it  which  fell  in  b.c.  207.  The  reverse  also  bears  a cornu- 
copia which  holds  four  circles  or  beads,  which  are  separated 
from  a large  one  by  an  obeliscal  figure.  Outside  of  the  cornu- 
copia is  the  moon’s  crescent,  and  beneath  it  are  eight  small  cir- 


264 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


cles,  and  above  the  cornucopia  and  over  the  larger  circle  is  a star. 
This  represents  the  rise  of  Sirius.  The  hieroglyphics  indi- 
cating the  rise  of  Sirius  contain  the  two  figures,  the  obelisk  and 
the  star.  The  Egyptians,  by  the  decree  of  Canopus,  proposed 
to  keep  the  rising  of  Sirius  to  the  1st  of  Payni,  and  it  appears 
they  observed  the  event  especially  either  upon  the  day  of  the 
full  moon,  or  the  new  moon  next  following  that  date.  In  b.c. 
207,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Philopator  (reckoned  from  1st  of 
Thoth  = October  11,  b.c.  208),  began  the  first  year  of  the  cycle  of 
eleven  years  of  the  series  of  b.c.  1318.  The  coin  of  Philopator, 
evidently  of  the  same  year,  bears  upon  the  reverse  a monogram 
containing  the  letters  PTE.  These  letters,  read  from  right  to 
left  following  the  rule  given,  denote  five  hundred  and  forty-one 
years.  The  fifteenth  year  of  Philopator  was  the  five  hundred 
and  forty-first  year  of  the  era  of  Nahonassar,  reckoned  from  b.c. 


747.  The  recognition  of  the  year  of  this  era  in  connection  with 
the  fifteenth  year  of  Philopator  establishes,  in  effect,  the  epoch 
of  the  era  to  be  b.c.  747.  In  the  chapter  on  the  subject  of  the  de- 
cree of  Canopus,  I advanced  the  hypothesis  that  it  was  enforced 
for  forty-two  years,  but  qualified  it  with  the  opinion  that  it  might 
have  been  for  a less  time.  My  puiqiose  then  was  to  show  that 
if  the  decree  was  ever  enforced,  the  effect  of  it  was  afterwards 
nullified  by  the  reinstatement  of  the  vague  year.  With  this 
coin  before  us  we  may,  perhaps,  come  nearer  the  truth.  If  the 
decree  was  enforced  for  nineteen  years,  counting  from  the  1st  of 
Payni,  the  day  of  the  rising  of  Sirius,  then  in  b.c.  219,  a Me- 
tonic  cycle  being  completed,  the  1st  of  Payni  will  have  the  same 
lunar  dates  as  in  b.c.  238 ; and  as  Sirius  will  rise  on  the  1st  of 
Payni,  it  will  also  be  on  the  day  of  the  full  moon.  Nineteen 
years  contain  also  a luni-sidereal  cycle, — that  is,  a cycle  reckoned 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


265 


by  sidereal  months.  In  nineteen  years  there  are  two  hundred 
and  fifty-four  sidereal  months  and  two  hundred  and  thirty-five 
lunar  months,  and  after  this  period  the  relations  between  the 
sun,  moon,  and  star  are,  to  all  intents,  the  same.  In  a system 
like  the  Egyptian,  when  the  advance  of  the  sidereal  year,  the 
tropical  year,  and  the  return  of  the  lunar  dates  were  made  the 
means  by  which  the  lapse  of  time  was  calculated  from  a com- 
parison of  recorded  dates  of  these  phenomena  upon  the  monu- 
ments, the  effect  of  reproducing  upon  the  1st  of  Payni,  b.c.  219, 
the  same  solar,  sidereal,  and  lunar  phenomena  as  characterized 
that  date  in  b.c.  238,  is  to  destroy  the  chronological  value  of  the 
interval  between  the  two  years.  Supposing  the  extra  interca- 
lary day  was  stopped  at  this  time,  five  of  them  having  been 
added,  and  from  now  on  the  reckoning  was  by  vague  years,  the 
dates  of  astronomical  phenomena  will  be  as  if  the  Egyptian  years 
of  b.c.  219,  218,  217,  etc.,  were  the  same  as  vague  years  of  b.c. 
238,  237,  236,  etc.  Beckoning  downward  from  an  early  era, 
when,  for  example,  the  star  rose  on  the  1st  of  Thoth  and  day  of 
full  moon,  b.c.  1318,  and  following  the  Sothic  cycle  as  described 
in  this  book,  the  third  great  season  of  the  Annus  Magnus  will  fall 
on  the  1st  of  Payni  ten  hundred  and  eighty  years  afterwards, 
b.c.  238,  and  if  the  fourth  of  Philopator,  which  had  for  its  epoch 
b.c.  219,  is  practically  at  the  beginning  of  the  third  season,  it  is 
made  to  appear  to  have  the  epoch  of  b.c.  238 ; and  as  the  fourth 
of  Philopator  was  the  five  hundred  and  eleventh  year  of  the  era 
of  Nabonassar  (reckoning  from  b.c.  728),  b.c.  238  obtains  that 
number  in  respect  to  b.c.  747,  because  the  vague  year  of  b.c.  238 
was  the  five  hundred  and  eleventh,  reckoned  from  b.c.  747.  In 
all  this  I am  looking  at  the  effect  of  dates  of  the  astronomical 
phenomena  in  determining  epochs.  My  hypothesis  was  that 
the  era  of  Nabonassar  was  raised  nineteen  years,  from  b.c.  728  to 
B.c.  747,  by  increasing  the  years  of  the  era  before  the  reign  of 
Darius  Nothus  nineteen  years,  and  now  we  can  discover  how 
the  Egyptian’s  dates  could  be  conformed  to  it  without  disturbing 
the  reigns  of  Philippic  ei’a.  We  may  further  suppose  this  ad- 
vance of  the  Egyptian  dates  of  five  days  to  remain  when  the 
vague  year,  at  this  time,  was  reinstated,  these  days  not  being 
subtracted  until  about  b.c.  197,  when  the  vague  dates  were  re- 
stored. 


23 


266 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


The  Eosetta  stone  mentions  the  30th  of  Mesori  as  the  date 
of  Epiphanes’s  birthday.  The  language  is : “ And  since  the 
thirtieth  of  Mesori,  when  the  king’s  birthday  is  celebrated,  as 
also  the  seventeenth  of  Mechir,  when  he  received  the  crown 
from  his  father,  (the  Priests)  have  recognized  them  as  epony- 
mous in  the  temples.”  From  this  we  learn  that  the  30th  of  Mesori 
was  the  eve  of  some  year  of  which  Epiphanes  became  the  epo- 
nym.  If  the  five  days  added  between  b.c.  238  and  b.c.  219  were 
subtracted  at  this  time,  the  year  will  end  with  Mesori  30,  the 
five  intercalary  days  being  omitted,  and  the  1st  of  Thoth  will 
follow  that  date,  and  Epiphanes  will  be  the  epouym  of  the  vague 
year  which  began  in  b.c.  197.  But  Epiphanes  was  the  eponym 
of  something  more  than  this.  In  b.c.  197,  before  the  subtrac- 
tion of  the  five  days,  the  1st  of  Thoth  concurred  with  the  13th 
of  October,  and  the  omission  of  the  five  intercalary  days 
brought  that  date  back  to  the  8th  of  October,  the  proper  con- 
currence between  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  the  vague  year  and  the 
Julian.  October  8 was  the  day  of  the  full  moon  following 
the  autumnal  equinox.  In  the  same  way  the  17th  of  Mechir, 
in  b.c.  197,  concurred  with  the  28th  of  March,  and,  by  the  omis- 
sion of  the  five  days,  the  concurrence  in  b.c.  196  will  be  between 
March  23  and  Mechir  17,  which  was  on  the  day  preceding  the 
vernal  equinox.  Epiphanes  was  made  eponymous  on  the  30th 
of  Mesori,  the  eve  of  the  full  moon  following  the  autumnal 
equinox,  and  on  the  17th  of  Mechir,  the  eve  of  the  vernal  equi- 
nox. The  date  30th  of  Mesori  is  the  one  of  the  two  not 
affected  by  the  restoration  of  the  vague  dates.  The  presence 
of  the  lunar  date  in  the  first  instance  may  be  accidental, — that 
is,  not  a necessary  feature  of  the  cycles  to  which  Epiphanes  be- 
came the  eponym.  The  restoration  of  the  vague  year  permitted 
the  use  of  a luni-solar  cycle  of  nineteen  years  simply  as  a period 
to  mark  the  advance  of  the  tropical  points  in  the  vague  year. 
I have  shown  in  a previous  chapter  on  this  subject  that  this  was 
formerly  done  by  a cycle  of  twenty-nine  years,  called  the  festi- 
val of  the  thirtieth  year,  which  was  without  the  lunar  dates. 
Still,  the  presence  of  the  lunar  dates  is  a temporary  improve- 
ment of  the  cycle,  and  goes  in  with  the  chronological  tendencies 
of  the  age.  The  Egyptians  show  a willingness  to  abandon  their 
old  usages  and  to  take  up  with  what  was  to  them  modern  im- 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


267 


provements.  The  beauty  of  their  old  system  lay  in  its  sim- 
plicity, its  adaptability  to  long  periods  of  time,  and  its  freedom 
from  any  necessity  of  change.  The  advantage  of  the  Canopic 
year  was  its  close  following  of  the  tropical  year,  but  this,  for 
any  length  of  time,  could  only  be  obtained  by  an  intricate  sys- 
tem of  intercalations.  This  exposed  the  time-measurement  to 
errors,  made  either  purposely  or  by  carelessness,  to  which,  under 
the  old  civilization,  it  was  particularly  exposed.  They  saw  this, 
and  abandoned  the  Canopic  year.  The  presence  of  the  lunar 
dates  in  the  tropical  cycle  did  not  affect  the  vague  year,  and 
whenever  they  marked  the  advance  of  the  tropical  year  they 
were  useful  for  that  purpose.  By  the  old  system  there  were 
four  of  these  tropical  cycles  severally  reckoned  from  each  of  the 
four  cardinal  points  of  the  sun’s  course.  A similar  method  may 
be  followed  now  with  cycles  of  nineteen  years,  which,  in  the 
old  parlance,  were  known  as  cycles  of  the  twentieth  year.  If 
the  preceding  suppositions  are  correct,  in  b.c.  207,  as  the  visible 
new  moon  was  on  July  20,  its  concurrent  date  in  the  Egyp- 
tian year  will  be  the  8th  of  Payni.  This  is  an  advance  of  the 
Julian  dates  three  days  from  b.c.  219,  when  the  1st  of  Payni 
concurred  with  July  16,  the  Canopic  year  ceasing  at  that 
time.  The  full  moon  was  on  July  3,  concurrent  with  the  21st 
of  Pachons,  eight  days  after  the  summer  solstice.  This  is  the 
date  of  the  rising  of  Sirius  indicated  upon  the  coin  of  Arsinoe. 
This  is  learned  from  the  symbolism  of  the  coin.  This  fact  also 
confirms  the  hypothesis  I have  advanced  in  reference  to  the  re- 
formation of  the  Macedonian  year  in  b.c.  237.  By  the  decree  of 
Canopus  the  17th  of  Tybi  concurred  with  the  7th  of  Apellfeus, 
and  this  causes  a concurrence  between  the  1st  of  Dius  and  the 
11th  of  Khoiakh.  In  the  next  year,  b.c.  237,  I have  claimed 
the  1st  of  Dius  was  made  to  concur  with  the  9th  of  Khoiakh, 
the  day  of  the  visible  new  moon  following  the  winter  solstice, 
and  this  will  produce  a concmrence  between  the  1st  of  July  and 
the  10th  of  Xanthicus.  From  July  1,  b.c.  237,  to  July  1,  b.c.  207, 
are  exactly  thirty  Julian  years,  which  show  a falling  back  of  the 
dates  of  the  lunar  year  of  nearly  three  hundred  and  twenty-six 
days.  In  this  time  the  1st  of  July  will  advance  from  the  10th 
of  Xanthicus,  its  place  in  b.c.  237,  into  the  thirty-first  lunar 
year,  and  concur  in  part  with  the  12th  of  Dystrus,  the  fifth 


268 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


month  of  the  Macedonian  year;  and  the  3d  of  July,  the  date  of 
the  full  moon,  will  concur  in  part  with  the  14th  of  Dystrus,  and 
the  visible  new  moon  will  be  on  the  1st  of  Xanthicus.  Turning 
to  the  explanation  of  the  disks  and  the  cornucopia,  we  have  for 
the  four  to  the  left  of  the  obeliscal  figure  four  complete  lunar 
months ; the  large  disk  beneath  the  star  denoting  the  full  moon 
of  the  fifth  month, — that  is,  14th  of  Dystrus;  and  the  eight 
disks  outside  of  the  cornucopia  are  eight  lunar  months,  which, 
with  the  four  first  mentioned,  comprise  the  twelve  months  of 
the  year.  The  circumstances  which  led  to  the  chronological 
episode  connected  with  the  decree  of  Canopus  were  ephemeral. 
It  is  desirable  that  evidence  should  be  discovered  showing  a 
recognition  of  the  true  epoch  of  the  era  of  Nabonassar.  The 
fifteenth  year  of  Philopator  was  the  five  hundred  and  twenty- 
second  year  of  the  true  era.  This  had  been  increased  nineteen 
years  to  five  hundred  and  forty-one  in  the  manner,  or  some  way 
similar  to  that,  already  described. 


COIN  OF  PTOLEMY  PHILOMETOR. 


The  obverse  of  the  coin  bears  the  portrait  of  Philometor 
partly  encircled  by  thirty-eight  small  circles  or  beads.  The  re- 
verse bears  an  eagle  supporting  a palm-branch,  from  which  two 
branches  have  been  removed,  leaving  a third  with  its  leaves. 


and  before  the  eagle  the  words  Ptolemlion  Philometros,  and  be- 


hind the  bird  the  following  signs  and  letters : 


first  of  the  upper  two  signs  is  the  Greek  letter  0,  and  the  word 
reads  Oeov.  Dr.  Sharpe  remarks,  “ The  portrait  of  the  king  is 
known  from  those  coins  which  bear  the  name  of  ‘ King  Ptolemy , 
the  mother-loving  god  ’ (see  Pig.  257).  The  eagle  on  the  other 
side  of  the  coins  has  a palm-branch  on  its  wing  or  by  its  side, 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


269 


which  may  be  supposed  to  mean  that  they  were  struck  in  the 
island  of  Cyprus.  We  have  not  before  met  with  the  title  of 
1 god'  on  the  coins  of  the  Ptolemies;  but,  as  eveiy  one  of  them 
had  been  so  named  in  the  hieroglyphical  inscriptions,  it  can 
scarcely  be  called  new.”  Between  the  legs  of  the  eagle  are  the 
letters  IAII,  and  behind  the  backward  leg  of  the  bird,  which  is 
walking,  is  the  letter  A. 

I have  shown  in  the  discussion  of  the  coins  of  Arsinoe  and 
Philopator  that  in  b.c.  219  the  dates  of  solar,  lunar,  and  sidereal 
phenomena  were  the  same  in  the  Canopic  year  as  they  were  in 
the  vague  year  of  b.c.  238.  A series  of  luni-solar  sidereal  cycles 
reckoned  from  b.c.  219  will  have  for  their  epochs  b.c.  219,  200, 
181.  The  last,  that  of  b.c.  181,  has  the  same  Julian  epoch  as 
Philometor’s  first  year.  Taking  b.c.  219  as  a technical  epoch, 
two  cycles  of  nineteen  years,  or  a period  of  thirty-eight  years, 
reckoned  from  the  full  moon  following  the  summer  solstice  of 
that  year,  will  be  complete  before  the  1st  of  Thoth  of  Philo- 
metor’s first  year.  The  thirty-eight  small  rings  on  the  obverse 
and  the  palm-branch  on  the  reverse  seem  to  have  a reference  to 
these  cycles.  Two  branches  have  been  removed,  which  may 
denote  the  first  two  cycles  which  are  completed,  the  third  cycle, 
represented  by  the  branch  bearing  the  leaves,  being  current. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  a luni-solar  cycle  of  nineteen 
years  was  observed  in  the  ordinary  way,  but  that  the  period 
was  used  instead  of  the  old  cycle  of  twenty-nine  years  to  mark 
the  advance  of  the  tropical  year  in  the  vague,  with  the  addi- 
tional circumstances  of  lunar  and  sidereal  phenomena.  This 
agrees  with  the  position  taken  by  the  authors  of  the  decree  of 
Canopus,  that  by  keeping  the  rise  of  Sotbis  to  the  1st  of  Payni 
the  seasons  would  retain  their  places  in  the  Canopic  year,  for 
when  this  year  was  abandoned  the  cycle  would  mark  the  ad- 
vance of  these  phenomena  in  the  vague  year.  The  advance  of 
the  tropical  point  for  nineteen  yeai’s  is  four  days,  fourteen 
hours  plus,  and  by  the  cycle  the  tropical  years  will  advance 
alternately  five  and  four  days  for  five  cycles,  or  ninety-five 
years,  when  the  series  will  be  begun  over  again,  there  being  for 
every  five  cycles  an  advance  of  five  days  for  each  of  three,  and 
of  four  days  for  each  of  two  cycles. 

The  letters  IAII  between  the  legs  of  the  eagle  may  denote 

23* 


270 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


138.  Behind  the  backward  leg  is  the  letter  A.  As  the  eagle  is 
walking,  the  symbolism  conveys  the  idea  that  this  letter,  which 
means  one,  denotes  that  one  year  of  Philometor  is  complete,  and 
that  his  second  year  is  current;  farther,  that  the  second  year  is 
the  one  hundred  and  thirty-eighth  year  of  some  era.  The  last 
year  of  Philip  Aridseus,  following  the  canon,  began  in  b.c.  318, 
and  his  successor,  Alexander  iEgus,  began  to  reign  in  b.c.  317. 
In  b.c.  316,  iEgus,  in  his  second  year,  was  made  a prisoner  by 
Cassander,  who  kept  him  in  bondage  during  the  remainder  of 
his  life.  b.c.  316  is  the  epoch  of  Cassander’s  first  year  as  king 
of  Macedon,  according  to  Blair,  who  ignores  iEgus  entirely  in 
his  chronological  table ; but  Blair  reckons  the  first  year  of 
Aridfeus  one  year  lower  than  the  canon  ; hence,  applying  Blair’s 
idea  to  the  canon  epochs,  Cassander’s  epoch  will  be  b.c.  317. 
iEgus  is  given  twelve  years  in  the  canon,  but  as  the  Seleucids 
began  their  era  in  b.c.  312,  not  waiting  until  the  death  of  iEgus 
to  throw  off  their  allegiance  to  the  house  of  Alexander  the 
Great,  so  Philometor  may  have  followed  a reckoning  for  the 
dynasty  of  the  Ptolemies  from  an  era  following  the  death  of 
Aridseus,  refusing  even  the  color  of  allegiance  to  the  usurper 
iEgus.  Taking  into  account  the  virtual  independence  of  the 
dynasties  of  the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucids,  their  royal  pride, 
and  the  severance  of  every  loyal  bond  by  the  death  of  Aridseus, 
would  they  for  a single  moment  have  subordinated  themselves 
to  the  usurper?  Even  if  they  had,  no  state  policy  would  in- 
fluence Philometor  to  follow  in  that  path,  and  exclude  him  from 
adopting  the  true  era  of  his  dynasty.  The  fact  that  Philometor 
was  for  a time  under  the  influence  of  the  Seleucid  dynasty  may 
encourage  this  view,  which  would  be  further  confirmed  if  he 
had  adopted  the  same  era  as  the  Seleucid.  The  one  hundred 
and  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  era  of  the  Ptolemies,  reckoned 
from  b.c.  317,  began  in  b.c.  180  with  the  second  year  of  Philo- 
metor. The  five  hundred  and  sixty-ninth  year  of  the  era  of 
Nabonassar,  reckoned  from  b.c.  717,  and  the  five  hundred  and 
fiftieth  year  of  the  era,  reckoned  from  b.c.  728,  began  also  on 
October  4,  b.c.  180.  The  group  of  letters  above  given,  which 
contains  the  word  dsnv,  has  an  enigmatical  character.  By  the 
side  of  the  E of  0sov  is  represented  a much  larger  E,  which  has 
before  it  a circle  denoting  a year.  If  to  the  larger  E is  given 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


271 


the  power  of  Epsilon,  with  the  accent  beneath,  it  normally  de- 
notes 5000,  and  if  the  smaller  E is  made  to  represent  the  next 
lower  order,  it  denotes  500.  These  added  together  will  rep- 
resent 5500,  which  without  the  final  cipher  will  stand  for  550. 
This  is  carrying  out  the  rule  laid  down,  that  in  tbese  enigmati- 
cal numbers  10  denoted  1,  and  that  the  value  of  a letter  de- 
pended upon  its  place, — that  is,  Epsilon  may  denote  thousands, 
hundreds,  tens,  and  units  when  it  occupies  the  place  of  any  of 
these  orders.  The  reading  of  the  number  550  is  obscured  by 
the  fact  that  part  of  it  forms  the  word  0sov.  If  it  was  so  done 
purposely  for  disguise  it  was  effectual,  because  from  tbe  reading 
upon  tbe  coin  of  Philopator  the  presumption  is  in  favor  of  tbe 
era  as  reckoned  from  b.c.  747.  Tbe  obverse  of  tbe  coin  of 
Arsinoe  Philopator  and  of  this  one  of  the  coin  of  Philometor 
appear  to  bear  the  same  kind  of  interpretation.  In  tbe  case  of 
Ai'sinoe,  tbe  sixteen  beads  of  her  necklace  may  mean  that  six- 
teen years  of  the  cycle  of  thirty-three  years  are  completed,  the 
seventeenth  year  being  current  in  the  first  year  of  Philopator, 
which  is  the  case.  In  the  same  way  the  thirty-eight  rings  or 
beads  on  tbe  obverse  of  Philometor’s  coin  may  represent  thirty- 
eight  completed  years  from  the  epoch  b.c,  219,  tbe  thirt}7-ninth 
year  being  current  in  b.c.  180. 

COIN  OF  ANTIOCHUS  VI. 

A coin  of  Antiochus  YI.,  Epiphanes  or  Dionysius,  in  the 
British  Museum,  renders  assistance  here.  It  is  mentioned  in 
the  “ Guide  to  the  Select  Greek  and  Eoman  Coins  exhibited  in 
Electrotype,”  by  Barclaj7  Y.  Head,  Assistant  Keeper  of  Coins, 
in  the  following  words:  “Antiochus  YI.  (Dionysius),  b.c.  145- 
142,  Eev.  Dioscm’i,  wt.  255.1  grs.”  The  same  guide  contains  a 
fac-simile  of  the  coin.  The  obverse  has  the  portrait  of  Anti- 
ochus. His  head  is  bound  with  a fillet,  above  which  pi’oject  six 
horns.  What  appear  to  be  the  two  ends  of  the  fillet  fall  below, 
one  curling  on  the  neck  and  the  other  curving  backward  from 
the  head.  From  the  last  mentioned  begins  a chain  similar  to 
that  of  echinus  moulding,  which  extends  over,  above,  and  around 
the  head  and  ends  at  the  ribbon  which  is  curled  upon  tbe  neck. 
This  chain  has  exactly  nineteen  links.  The  first  horn,  counting 
from  the  back  forward,  passes  between  the  second  and  third 


272 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


links,  and  each  of  the  five  spaces  between  the  six  horns  is  occu- 
pied by  a link.  The  reverse  of  the  coin  has  the  name  of  Anti- 
ochus,  beneath  which  are  two  horsemen  riding.  Under  the 
horses  are  the  letters  0SP,  and  back  of  the  riders  the  letters 
TPT.  Following  the  clew  obtained  from  the  coins  of  Arsinoe 
and  Philometor,  the  obverse  of  this  coin  represents  the  condi- 
tion of  things  preceding  either  his  reign  or  the  era  by  which 
he  reckoned ; in  the  latter  case  the  reverse  will  have  the  year 
of  the  era  in  which  he  began  to  reign,  and  the  two  together 
will  furnish  another  era  which  may  be  technical.  I have  shown 
upon  what  grounds  it  may  be  believed  Philometor  reckoned 
from  an  era  which  had  for  its  epoch  b.c.  317.  Using  this  era  for 
the  interpretation  of  the  obverse  of  the  coin,  the  following  result 


is  obtained : The  nineteen  links  of  the  chain  denote  a Metonic  or 
cycle  of  nineteen  years.  This  cycle  was  observed  by  the  Greeks 
from  the  epoch  of  its  inception,  b.c.  432.  The  six  horns  of  Anti- 
ochus  may  denote  six  cycles  of  nineteen  years,  or  one  hundred 
and  fourteen  years,  and  as  the  first  horn  follows  the  second  link 
of  the  chain,  this  may  denote  that  the  second  year  of  the 
seventh  cycle  is  current, — that  is,  the  epoch  of  the  era  is  the 
one  hundred  and  sixteenth  year  of  the  technical  era  of  the 
first  Metonic  cycle,  b.c.  432.  In  b.c.  317  began  the  one  hundred 
and  sixteenth  year  of  the  era  of  b.c.  432,  the  four  hundred  and 
thirty-second  year  of  the  era  of  Nabonassar,  reckoned  from  b.c. 
747,  and  the  four  hundred  and  thirteenth  year  of  that  era,  reck- 
oned from  b.c.  728.  On  the  reverse  the  Greek  letters,  TPT , back 
of  the  riders,  are  symbolized  as  being  left  behind,  and  these, 
read  from  right  to  left,  denote  400,  100,  and  300.  These,  with- 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


273 


out  the  ciphers,  denote  413.  We  have  just  shown  that  in  b.c. 
317  began  the  four  hundred  and  thirteenth  year  of  the  era  of 
Nabonassar,  reckoned  from  b.c.  728.  The  Greek  letters  beneath 
the  horses,  0SP , read  from  right  to  left,  denote  100,  60,  and  9. 
According  to  Hales,  Antiochus  began  to  reign  in  the  one  bun- 
dled and  sixty-ninth  year  of  the  Seleucid  era.  Taking  b.c.  317, 
and  the  four  hundred  and  thirteenth  year  of  the  era  of  Nabo- 
nassar,  as  explained  above,  for  the  epoch  of  the  Seleucid  era, 
the  one  hundred  and  sixty-ninth  year  of  that  era  will  have  for 
its  epoch  b.c.  149.  Hales  reckons  the  one  hundred  and  sixty-ninth 
year  fi’om  b.c.  312,  and  places  Antiochus’s  first  year  in  b.c.  144. 
b.c.  312  is  the  usual  epoch  for  the  Seleucid  era,  but  there  is 
sufficient  elasticity  in  the  Seleucid  chronology,  judging  by  the 
variety  of  epochs  which  chronologers  give  to  individual  reigns,  to 
allow  for  a collection  of  five  years  in  that  era.  A luni-solar 
year,  known  as  the  Syro-Macedonian  year,  has  generally  been 
supposed  to  be  the  year  adapted  to  the  Seleucid  era.  This  kind 
of  year  is  found  upon  the  coin,  but  it  belongs  to  the  Greek  year. 
The  Syro-Macedonian  year  began  at  the  autumnal  equinox,  but 
as  the  first  Book  of  Maccabees  places  an  expedition  into  Judea 
in  the  one  hundi’ed  and  forty-ninth  year  of  the  era  of  the  Se- 
leucids,  and  the  second  Book  of  Maccabees  places  the  same  in 
the  one  hundred  and  fiftieth  year  of  the  era,  an  opinion  has 
prevailed  that  there  were  two  reckonings  of  the  beginning 
of  the  Syro-Macedonian  year,  one  commencing  it  at  the  au- 
tumnal equinox  and  the  other  at  the  vernal  equinox.  This 
is  the  view  of  Dean  Prideaux,  and  he  places  the  expedition  as 
taking  place  near  the  autumnal  equinox.  The  first  six  months 
of  the  one  hundred  and  fiftieth  year  of  one  reckoning  will  over- 
lap the  last  six  months  of  the  one  hundred  and  forty-ninth  year 
of  the  other  reckoning,  and  the  event  falling  within  the  over- 
lapping of  the  years  will  belong  to  both.  But  if  the  chron- 
ological year  of  the  Seleucid  era  was  the  vague  year,  as  it 
appears  from  this  coin  to  have  been,  it  was  reckoned  from  the  1st 
of  Thoth.  Following  the  chronology  just  laid  down,  there  is  an 
interchange  of  numbers  between  the  Julian  year  and  the  year  of 
the  Seleucid  era,  and  the  year  for  the  beginning  of  the  expedition. 
This  must  be  kept  in  mind  to  avoid  confusion.  In  b.c.  169  the 
autumnal  equinox  was  on  September  27,  and  the  1st  of  Thoth 


274 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


concurred  with  October  1.  This  was  the  one  hundred  and 
forty-ninth  year  of  the  Seleucid  era,  reckoned  from  b.c.  317. 
The  expedition,  if  made  about  at  the  time  of  the  autumnal  equi- 
nox in  b.c.  168,  will  lie  so  near  the  beginning  of  the  one  hundred 
and  fiftieth  year  that,  without  any  real  discrepancy,  it  may  be 
placed  in  either  of  the  two  years  of  the  era.  The  beginning  of 
it  in  the  year  149  will  allow  most  of  the  principal  events  con- 
nected with  it  to  fall  in  the  year  150  of  the  era. 

COIN  OP  ARSINOE  PHILADELPHUS. 

The  reverse  has  the  double  cornucopia,  one  part  containing 
two  disks,  separated  by  a division  mark,  and  the  other  part  one 
disk,  separated  from  the  others  in  the  same  way.  A coin  of 
Arsinoe  in  the  British  Museum  has  in  each  part  two  disks,  sepa- 
rated from  the  others  by  division  marks.  The  reverse  of  the 
first  coin  mentioned  bears  the  following  letters  in  a straight 


line,  but  the  first  three  are  on  the  left  and  the  last  two  on  the 
right  of  the  cornucopia,  LATIIA.  Dr.  Sharpe’s  description  of 
it  is,  “ Coin  of  Arsinoe  Philadelphus,  dated  in  year  33  of  the 
king’s  reign,  and  with  the  mint-mark  FIA,  for  Paphos,  in  the 
island  of  Cyprus,  where  it  was  struck.”  He  reads  the  first 
three  letters,  ( L ) Lukabantos  (AT)  33, — that  is,  year  33.  But 
an  additional  meaning  may  be  put  upon  these  letters.  Reading 
all  the  letters  as  if  there  were  no  separation  between  them,  we 
get  the  year  3381.  If  this  is  a year  of  the  era  of  Mena,  we 
discover  the  opinion  in  the  time  of  Philadelphus,  if  not  that  of 
Manetho,  who  wrote  his  history  in  this  reign,  of  the  era  of  the 
first  Egyptian  king.  A cycle  of  eleven  years  of  the  series  of 
b.c.  1318  began  in  b.c.  284,  in  the  first  year  of  Philadelphus. 
The  circumstances  of  his  accession  are  peculiar.  His  father, 


THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


275 


Ptolemy  Lagus,  resigned  the  kingdom  into  the  hands  of  his  son, 
giving  him  the  precedence  as  king,  while  reserving  for  himself 
the  subordinate  office  of  satrap.  His  purpose  was  to  share  the 
power  with  his  son  as  a sort  of  minister  of  state,  in  order  to 
tide  over  the  difficulties  and  dangers  in  the  way  of  a new  ruler. 
Soter  celebrated  the  accession  of  Philadelphus  with  a pageantry 
of  surpassing  splendor.  It  was  made  in  imitation  of  similar 
ones  in  ancient  times.  In  the  procession,  which  began  before 
daybreak  and  continued  after  sunset,  were  emblems  and  emblem- 
atical figures  of  the  year.  Hr.  Sharpe  gives  this  part  of  the 
description  of  the  procession  as  follows:  “An  altar  was  carried 
next,  covered  with  golden  ivy-leaves,  with  a garland  of  golden 
vine-leaves  tied  with  white  ribands ; and  this  was  followed  by  a 
hundred  and  twenty  boys  in  scarlet  frocks,  carrying  bowls  of 
crocus,  myrrh,  and  frankincense,  which  made  the  air  fragrant 
with  the  scent.  Then  came  forty  dancing  satyrs  crowned 
with  golden  ivy-leaves,  with  their  naked  bodies  stained  with 
gay  colors,  each  carrying  a crown  of  vine-leaves  and  gold ; then 
two  Sileni  in  scarlet  cloaks'  and  white  boots,  one  having  the 
hat  and  wand  of  Mercury  and  the  other  a trumpet ; and  between 
them  walked  a man,  six  feet  high,  in  tragic  dress  and  mask, 
meant  for  the  year,  carrying  a golden  cornucopia.  He  was  fol- 
lowed by  a tall  and  beautiful  woman,  meant  for  the  Lustrum  of 
five  years,  carrying  in  one  hand  a crown  and  in  the  other  a 
palm-branch.”  The  date  of  this  celebration  may  be  inferred 
from  some  of  the  circumstances  just  recited.  The  ceremonies 
began  before  daybreak,  and  we  are  reminded  of  the  inscription 
of  Eameses  II.  relating  the  rise  of  Sirius  on  the  23d  of  Athyr 
(b.c.  999).  “He  raised  his  hand,  which  bore  the  incense-vessel, 
upwards  to  the  heavenly  orb  of  light  of  the  living  god.  The 
sacrificial  gifts  were  splendid,  they  were  received  with  satisfac- 
tion in  all  his  ...(?)  The  king  (now)  returned  from  the  capi- 
tal of  the  land  of  the  South.  [As  soon  as]  the  sun  [had  risen], 
the  journey  was  commenced.”  The  rising  of  Sirius,  b.c.  284, 
was  the  first  in  the  reign  of  Philadelphus,  the  second  (follow- 
ing the  cycle)  was  in  b.c.  273,  the  third  in  b.c.  262,  and  the 
fourth  in  b.c.  251.  Taking  the  one  in  b.c.  251  as  the  one  for 
the  date  of  the  coin,  we  have  b.c.  251  plus  3381  equals  3632 
minus  3 equals  b.c.  3629  for  the  Julian  epoch  of  Mena,  the 


276 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES. 


first  Egyptian  king.  The  epoch  of  the  three  thousand  three 
hundredth  year  of  the  era  will  be  b.c.  333  (3629  — 3300  -f  4)  ; this 
is  the  epoch  of  the  last  year  of  the  last  Dai’ius,  who  was  con- 
quered by  Alexander  the  Great.  The  epoch  of  Alexander  was 
the  three  thousand  three  hundred  and  first  year  of  the  era. 
With  this,  the  thirty-fourth  year  of  Philadelphus,  was  the 
eighty-first  year  of  the  era  of  Alexander,  and  the  three 
thousand  three  hundred  and  eighty-first  year  of  the  era  of 
Mena.  The  reading  “year  33”  is  carried  out,  but  with  a 
different  sense.  Philadelphus’s  first  year  was  the  thirty-third 
year  of  the  era  of  the  Ptolemies,  reckoned  from  b.c.  317. 
The  time  of  the  duration  of  the  Egyptian  monarchy  is  one 
which  has  been  much  discussed.  Dr.  Lepsius  lays  great  stress 
upon  the  number  3555,  which,  he  says,  is  derived  from  Manetho. 
This  number  of  Egyptian  years,  or  three  thousand  five  hundred 
and  fifty-three  Julian  years  (it  should  be  three  thousand  five 
hundred  and  fifty-two  years  and  two  hundred  and  twelve  days), 
he  ends  in  b.c.  340 ; this  epoch  being  that  of  the  twentieth 
year  of  Ochus,  who  at  that  time  terminated  the  Egyptian  em- 
pire, and  from  this  he  calculates  the  era  of  Mena  to  be  b.c.  3893 
(should  be  b.c.  3892).  The  difference  between  3892  and  3629  is 
two  hundred  and  sixty-three  years.  The  period  of  three  thou- 
sand five  hundred  and  fifty-five  years  seems  to  have  an  artificial 
character,  and  this  is  what  might  be  expected;  but  in  this 
aspect  it  refers  more  to  the  lunar  year  than  to  the  vague,  and 
manifests  no  development  of  the  technical  numbers  of  the 
Egyptian  system.  On  the  other  hand,  3300  has  for  its  basis  the 
number  of  days  in  the  Egyptian  month,  and  the  period  contains 
thirty  periods  of  one  hundred  and  ten  years,  “ the  perfect  age” 
of  the  monuments  (ten  cycles  of  eleven  years).  I am  of 
opinion  that  the  use  of  numbers  in  a technical  sense,  or  one  dif- 
ferent from  the  ordinary,  may  explain  some  of  the  statements 
of  Herodotus.  In  Book  II.  100,  he  says  the  priests  read  him  the 
names  of  three  hundred  and  thirty  sovereigns  who  succeeded 
Menes,  the  last  of  which  was  Mceris.  This  probably  means  that 
this  number  stopped  at  about  the  time  of  Moeris.  If  instead  of 
three  hundred  and  thirty  kings  the  number  really  meant  was 
thirty-three  kings,  the  statement  being  technical,  like  some  of 
the  numbers  we  have  been  treating,  it  is  borne  out  very  closely 


THE  CHKONOLOGY  OF  COINS. 


277 


by  the  table  of  Abydos.  The  fifth  dynasty  ended  with  Unas, 
the  thirty-third  king  of  the  list  of  Abydos.  Dr.  Brugsch  writes, 
“ It  is  with  this  king  that  the  fifth  dynasty  of  the  Manethonian 
list  ends,  in  accordance  with  the  historical  canon  of  Turin, 
which  after  the  name  of  Unas  terminates  the  first  section  of  the 
series  of  the  Pharaohs,  by  giving  the  total  of  the  years  of  the 
reigns  and  the  number  of  the  kings  which  preceded.  . . . The 
observation  is  of  great  importance  for  a classification  of  the 
kings  of  the  Egyptian  canon,  because  it  proves  to  us  that  they 
formed  one  entire  group,  probably  belonging  to  the  same  family. 
These  were  the  most  famous  kings  of  Memphis,  the  most  an- 
cient sovereigns  of  the  history  of  the  world.”*  The  third  king 
of  the  next  dynasty  (the  sixth)  was  Merira  Pepi,  the  thirty- 
sixth  of  the  table  of  Abydos.  Pepi  is  the  most  important  king 
of  this  dynasty ; he  is  possibly  the  Moeris  of  Herodotus.  The 
first  Egyptian  empire  on  this  basis  had  a duration  of  eleven 
hundred  years,  following  the  Herodotan  reckoning  of  three  gen- 
erations to  a century. 


* “ Egypt  under  the  Pharaohs”  (Brugsch),  vol.  i.  pp.  94,  95.  Eng.  trans. 


24 


278 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES, 


Chronological  Table 

ADAPTED  TO  THE  PRECEDING  EXPLANATION  OF  THE  COINS. 


1 

B.C. 

Era 

Nai 

NASS 

B. 

747 

OF 

SO- 

AR, 

728 

1 

CO 

« 

< 

C£ 

W 

o 

E 

ft, 

3 

£ 

1 

a 

EH 

a 04 
CO 
fi  CO 

z . 

<5  O 

X Pft 
a . 
a e- 
< < 

o ^ 
2“ 
cs 

W 

| Era  of  the  Ptolemies  and 
| the  Seleucids,  b.o.  317. 

Regnal 

Years 

from 

THE 

Canon. 

| Cycles  of  Eleven  Years, 

1 Epoch  of  Series  b.c.  1318. 

The  concurrent  dates  between  the  1st 
of  Thoth  and  the  Julian  year  in  this 
column  are  for  the  vague  1st  of  Thoth  ' 
established  from  the  observation  of 
Timocharis. 

B. 

285 

464 

445 

40 

48 

33 

hj 

l 

H 

1st  Thoth  = 30th  October. 

284 

465 

446 

41 

49 

34 

1-2 

i 

b.c.  284,  June  30  = Pachons  4.  Celebration 

283 

466 

447 

42 

50 

35 

p 

3 

2 

of  the  accession  of  Philadelphus  in  the 

282 

467 

448 

43 

51 

36 

Qj 

4 

3 

thirty-third  year  of  the  era  of  the  Ptol- 

B. 

281 

468 

449 

44 

52 

37 

5 

4 

emies  and  on  the  day  of  the  heliacal 

280 

469 

450 

45 

53 

38 

6 

5 

rising  of  Sirius  in  connection  with  the 

279 

470 

AS! 

46 

54 

39 

s 

7 

6 

visible  new  moon  following  the  sum- 

278 

471 

452 

47 

55 

40 

8 

7 

mer  solstice. 

B. 

277 

472 

453 

48 

56 

41 

9 

8 

1st  Thoth  = October  28. 

276 

473 

454 

49 

57 

42 

10 

9 

275 

474 

455 

50 

58 

43 

11 

10 

274 

475 

456 

51 

59 

44 

12 

11 

B. 

273 

476 

457 

52 

60 

45 

13 

1 

1st  Thoth  = October  27. 

272 

477 

458 

53 

61 

46 

14 

2 

271 

478 

459 

54 

62 

47 

15 

3 

270 

479 

460 

55 

63 

48 

16 

4 

B. 

269 

480 

461 

56 

64 

49 

17 

5 

1st  Thoth  = October  26. 

268 

481 

462 

57 

65 

50 

18 

6 

267 

482 

463 

58 

66 

51 

19 

7 

266 

483 

464 

59 

67 

52 

20 

8 

B. 

265 

484 

465 

60 

68 

53 

21 

9 

1st  Thoth  = October  25. 

264 

485 

466 

61 

69 

54 

22 

10 

263 

486 

467 

62 

70 

55 

23 

11 

262 

487 

468 

63 

71 

56 

24 

1 

B. 

261 

488 

469 

64 

72 

57 

25 

2 

1st  Thoth  = October  24. 

260 

489 

470 

65 

73 

58 

26 

3 

259 

490 

471 

66 

74 

59 

27 

4 

258 

491 

472 

67 

75 

60 

28 

5 

B. 

257 

492 

473 

68 

76 

61 

29 

6 

1st  Thoth  = October  23. 

256 

493 

474 

69 

77 

62 

30 

7 

255 

494 

475 

70 

78 

63 

31 

8 

254 

495 

476 

71 

79 

64 

32 

9 

B. 

253 

496 

477 

72 

80 

65 

33 

10 

1st  Thoth  = October  22. 

252 

497 

478 

73 

81 

66 

34 

11 

251 

498 

479 

74 

82 

67 

35 

1 

Date  of  coin  of  Arsinoe  Philadelphus, 

250 

499 

480 

75 

83 

68 

36 

2 

b.c.  251.  July  9 = Pachons  21,  the  date 

B. 

249 

500 

481 

76 

84 

69 

37 

3 

of  the  heliacal  rising  of  Sirius  in  connec- 

248 

501 

482 

77 

85 

70 

38 

4 

tion  with  the  full  moon  following  the 

247 

502 

483 

78 

86 

71 

w 

1 

5 

summer  solstice,  and  in  the  eighty-first 

246 

503 

484 

79 

87 

72 

P 

2 

6 

year  of  the  era  of  Alexander  the  Great. 

B. 

245 

504 

485 

80 

88 

73 

3 

7 

1st  Thoth  = October  20. 

244 

505 

486 

81 

89 

74 

CD 

4 

8 

243 

506 

487 

82 

90 

75 

S" 

5 

9 

242 

507 

488 

83 

91 

76 

• 

6 

10 

B. 

241 

508 

489 

84 

92 

77 

7 

11 

1st  Thoth  = October  19. 

240 

509 

490 

85 

93 

78 

8 

1 

THE  CHRONOLOGY  OF  COINS, 


279 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Eras  of 
Nabo- 
nassar, 

B.O. 

Philippic  Era,  b.c.  324.  j 

! ERA  OF  ALEXANDER  THE 

Great,  b.c.  332. 

3 

s • 

< p 

f)  CO 

4 . 

-*  O 

3 w 
j 

H S 

° w 

< x 

Si 

Regnal 

Years 

from 

THE 

Canon. 

o co 

S rH 
< 00 

4 «-< 

H 

5 « 

4 rr 

w 2 

J ec 

° s 

H P 
o 9 
ft 

Lunar  Cycle  of  thirty- 

three  Years,  Epoch  b.c.237. 

Tropical  period  of  jnine- 
| teen  Years,  Epoch  b.c.  219. 

747 

728 

239 

510 

491 

86 

94 

79 

9 

2 

238 

511 

492 

87 

95 

80 

10 

3 

Rise  of  Sirius  on  1st  Payni  = July 

16,  b.c.  238. 

B. 

237 

512 

493 

88 

96 

81 

11 

4 

i 

1st  Thoth  = October  18. 

236 

513 

494 

89 

97 

82 

12 

5 

2 

235 

514 

495 

90 

98 

83 

13 

6 

3-4 

234 

515 

496 

91 

99 

84 

14 

7 

5 

B. 

233 

516 

497 

92 

100 

85 

15 

8 

6 

1st  Thoth  = October  17.  (Cano- 

232 

517 

498 

93 

101 

86 

16 

9 

7 

pic  year,  October  18.) 

231 

518 

499 

94 

102 

87 

17 

10 

8 

230 

519 

500 

95 

103 

88 

18 

11 

9 

B. 

229 

520 

501 

96 

104 

89 

19 

1 

10 

1st  Thoth  = October  16.  (Cano- 

228 

521 

502 

97 

105 

90 

20 

2 

11 

pic  year,  October  18.) 

227 

522 

503 

98 

106 

91 

21 

3 

12 

226 

523 

504 

99 

107 

92 

22 

4 

13 

B. 

225 

524 

505 

100 

108 

93 

23 

5 

14 

1st  Thoth  = October  15.  (Cano- 

224 

525 

506 

101 

109 

94 

24 

6 

15 

pic  year,  October  18.) 

223 

526 

507 

102 

110 

95 

25 

7 

16 

222 

527 

508 

103 

111 

96 

1 

8 

17 

'P 

Accession  of  Philopator  in  the 

B. 

221 

528 

509 

104 

112 

97 

E 2 

9 

18 

seventeenth  year  of  the  lunar 

220 

529 

510 

105 

113 

98 

O 3 

10 

19 

cycle  of  thirty-three  years.  1st 

g-T* 

Thoth  = October  14.  (Canopic 

o 

CL  O' 

year,  October  18.) 

b 

219 

530 

511 

106 

114 

99 

4 

11 

20 

i 

218 

531 

512 

107 

115 

100 

5 

1 

21 

2 

B. 

217 

532 

513 

108 

116 

101 

6 

2 

22 

3 

1st  Thoth  = October  13.  (Oc- 

216 

533 

514 

109 

117 

102 

7 

3 

23 

4 

tober  17.) 

215 

534 

515 

110 

118 

103 

8 

4 

24 

5 

214 

535 

516 

111 

119 

104 

9 

5 

25 

6 

B. 

213 

536 

517 

112 

120 

105 

10 

6 

26 

7 

1st  Thoth  = October  12.  (Oc- 

212 

537 

518 

113 

121 

106 

11 

7 

27 

8 

tober  16.) 

211 

538 

519 

114 

122 

107 

12 

8 

28 

9 

210 

539 

520 

115 

123 

108 

13 

9 

29 

10 

B. 

209 

540 

521 

116 

124 

109 

14 

10 

30 

11 

1st  Thoth  = October  11.  (Oc- 

208 

541 

522 

117 

125 

110 

15 

11 

31 

12 

tober  15.) 

207 

542 

523 

118 

126 

111 

16 

1 

32 

13 

Date  of  coins  of  Philopator  and 

206 

543 

524 

119 

127 

112 

17 

2 

33 

14 

Arsinoe,  b.c.  207,  July  3,  concur- 

B. 

205 

544 

525 

120 

128 

113 

tel  l 

3 

(34) 

15 

rent  with  14th  Dystrus  = 21st 

Paehons  in  the  five  hundred 

and  forty-first  year  of  the  era 

2 

of  Nabonassar  and  the  fifteenth 

year  of  Philopator. 

201 

545 

526 

121 

129 

114 

2 

4 

1 

16 

1st  Thoth  = October  10.  (Oc- 

203 

546 

527 

122 

130 

115 

3 

5 

2 

17 

tober  14.) 

202 

547 

528 

123 

131 

116 

4 

6 

3-4 

18 

B 

201 

548 

529 

124 

132 

117 

5 

7 

5 

19 

1st  Thoth  = October  9.  (Oc- 

200 

549 

530 

125 

133 

118 

6 

8 

6 

1 

tober  13.) 

280 


JEWISH  AND  SYNCHRONOUS  HISTORIES, 


Chronological  Table  (Continued). 


B.C. 

Era 

Na 

NAS 

B 

747 

S OF 

BO- 

SAB, 

C. 

728 

Philippic  Era,  b.c.  324. 

1 Era  of  Alexander  the 

Great,  b.c.  332. 

1 Era  of  the  Ptolemies  and 

1 THE  SELEUCIDS,  B.C.  317. 

Regnal 

Years 

FROM 

THE 

Canon. 

Cycles  of  Eleven  Years, 

[ Epoch  of  Series  b.c.  1318. 

Lunar  Cycle  of  Thirty- 

| three  Years,  Epoch  b.c.  237. 

Tl 

Pei 

Ni 

1 

B.C. 

219 

OPIC 

UODS 

NETE 

fEAR 

B.C. 

197 

AL 

OF 

EN 

3. 

B.C. 

196 

199 

550 

531 

126 

134 

119 

7 

9 

7 

2 

198 

551 

532 

127 

135 

120 

8 

10 

8 

3 

B. 

197 

552 

533 

128 

136 

121 

9 

11 

9 

4 

1 

1st  Thoth  = October  8. 

196 

553 

534 

129 

137 

122 

10 

1 

5 

2 

i 

195 

554 

535 

130 

138 

123 

11 

2 

6 

3 

2 

194 

555 

536 

131 

139 

124 

12 

3 

7 

4 

3 

B. 

193 

556 

537 

132 

140 

125 

13 

4 

8 

5 

4 

1st  Thoth  = October  7. 

192 

557 

538 

133 

141 

126 

14 

5 

9 

6 

5 

191 

558 

539 

134 

142 

127 

15 

6 

10 

7 

6 

190 

559 

540 

135 

143 

128 

16 

7 

11 

8 

7 

B. 

189 

560 

541 

136 

144 

129 

17 

8 

12 

9 

8 

1st  Thoth  = October  6. 

188 

561 

542 

137 

145 

130 

18 

9 

13 

10 

9 

187 

562 

543 

138 

146 

131 

19 

10 

14 

11 

10 

186 

563 

544 

139 

147 

132 

20 

11 

15 

12 

11 

B. 

185 

564 

545 

140 

148 

133 

21 

1 

16 

13 

12 

1st  Thoth  •=  October  5. 

184 

565 

546 

141 

149 

134 

22 

2 

17 

14 

13 

183 

566 

547 

142 

150 

135 

23 

3 

18 

15 

14 

182 

567 

548 

143 

151 

136 

24 

4 

19 

16 

15 

B. 

181 

568 

549 

144 

152 

137 

1 

5 

1 

17 

16 

1st  Thoth  = October  4 

180 

569 

550 

145 

153 

138 

2 

6 

2 

18 

17 

Bate  of  coin  of  Philo- 

179 

570 

551 

146 

154 

139 

o 

3 

7 

3 

19 

18 

metor,  B.c.  180,  550th 

178 

571 

552 

147 

155 

140 

3 

4 

8 

4 

1 

19 

year  of  the  era  of  Na- 

bonassar  of  b.c.  728. 

B. 

177 

572 

553 

148 

156 

141 

5 

9 

5 

2 

1 

1st  Thoth  = October  3. 

APPENDIX. 


I.  A METHOD  TO  CALCULATE  THE  DATES  OF  NEW  AND  FULL 

MOONS. 

Investigations  of  the  kind  made  in  this  work  require  an  easy 
and  quick  method  to  calculate  new  and  full  moons.  Often  the 
historical  data  is  so  limited  that  the  Avork  must  be  largely  hypo- 
thetical. More  than  one  hypothesis  may  suggest  itself,  and 
these  must  be  tested  with  facility.  The  method  is  accurate 
enough  to  encourage  or  discourage,  as  the  case  may  be,  a more 
scientific  calculation.  More  than  this, — with  other  sufficient 
facts  confirming  it,  no  other  calculation  is  necessary  to  deter- 
mine with  reasonable  certainty  the  dates  of  new  and  full 
moons. 

The  following  cycle  of  seventy-six  Julian  years  is  constructed 
for  synodical  months  of  twenty-nine  days,  forty-four  minutes, 
and  three  seconds,  nearly.  It  is  a modification  of  the  cycle  of 
Callippus.  It  commences  Avith  the  neAv  moon  on  the  1st  of  Janu- 
ary, 0 hours,  0 minutes,  0 seconds, — that  is,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  first  day  of  the  civil  year. 

The  times  placed  opposite  the  years  of  the  cycle  denote  the 
age  of  the  month  of  January  at  the  time  of  neAv  moon.  In 
this  it  differs  from  the  ordinary  Metonic,  Avhich  gives  the  age 
of  the  moon.  When  the  neAv  moon  is  on  the  1st  of  January, 
0 hours,  0 minutes,  0 seconds,  it  will  return  again  after  twenty- 
nine  days,  tAvelve  hours,  forty-four  minutes,  and  three  seconds, 
Avhich  Avill  be  on  the  30th  of  January. 

24* 


281 


282 


APPENDIX. 


Table  of  Cycle  of  Seventy-six  Years. 


Years. 

Abe  of 
January. 

Years. 

Age  of 
January. 

Years. 

Age  of 
January. 

Years. 

Age  of 
January. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

20 

0 

16 

31 

11 

39 

0 

9 

2 

22 

58 

0 

1 

33 

33 

2 

18 

21 

32 

27 

21 

18 

14 

3 

48 

40 

19 

6 

35 

29 

59 

18 

23 

6 

10 

3 

8 

6 

21 

11 

22 

7 

22 

52 

22 

41 

7 

15 

23 

33 

60 

8 

7 

54 

44 

4 

27 

3 

53 

48 

23 

26 

20 

24 

59 

42 

26 

12 

56 

10 

61 

26 

5 

27 

21 

5 

15 

12 

42 

22 

24 

16 

5 

13 

33  I 

43 

15 

21 

44 

44 

62 

15 

14 

15 

55 

6 

4 

21 

30 

56 

25 

4 

14 

2 

7 1 

44 

5 

6 

33 

18 

63 

4 

23 

4 

29 

7 

23 

19 

3 

33 

26 

23 

11 

34 

44 

45 

23 

4 

6 

55 

64 

23 

20 

37 

6 

8 

13 

3 

52 

7 

27 

12 

20 

23 

18 

46 

12 

12 

54 

29 

65 

12 

5 

25 

40 

9 

1 

12 

40 

41 

28 

2 

5 

11 

52 

47 

1 

21 

43 

3 

66 

1 

14 

14 

14 

10 

20 

in 

13 

20 

29 

20 

2 

44 

31 

48 

20 

19 

15 

42 

67 

20 

11 

46 

53 

11 

9 

19 

1 

54 

30 

9 

11 

33 

5 

49 

9 

4 

4 

16 

68 

9 

20 

35 

27 

12 

28 

16 

34 

31 

31 

28 

9 

5 

42 

50 

28 

1 

36 

53 

69 

27 

18 

8 

4 

13 

17 

1 

23 

5 

32 

17 

17 

54 

16 

51 

17 

10 

25 

27 

70 

17 

2 

56 

38 

14 

6 

10 

11 

39 

33 

6 

2 

44 

50 

52 

6 

19 

14 

1 

71 

6 

11 

45 

12 

15 

25 

7 

44 

16 

34 

25 

0 

15 

27 

53 

24 

16 

46 

38 

72 

25 

9 

17 

49 

16 

14 

16 

32 

50 

35 

14 

9 

4 

1 

54 

14 

1 

35 

12 

73 

13 

18 

6 

23 

17 

3 

1 

21 

34 

36 

3 

17 

52 

35 

55 

3 

10 

23 

46 

74 

3 

2 

54 

57 

18 

21 

22 

54 

1 

37 

21 

15 

25 

12 

56 

22 

7 

56 

23 

75 

22 

0 

27 

34 

19 

11 

7 

42 

35 

38 

11 

0 

13 

46 

57 

10 

16 

44 

57 

76 

11 

9 

16 

8 

CORRECTIONS  AND  EPOCH. 

At  the  end  of  seventy-six  years,  the  lunar  period  being  shorter 
by  about  five  hours,  fifty-five  minutes,  and  sixteen  seconds  than 
the  Julian,  the  next  or  following  cycle  of  seventy-six  years  will 
have  new  moon  five  hours,  fifty-five  minutes,  and  sixteen  seconds 
before  its  beginning,  and  each  succeeding  cycle  will  have  new 
moon  for  January  in  each  year  five  hours,  fifty-five  minutes,  and 
sixteen  seconds  earlier  than  the  previous  one. 

The  following  table  of  corrections  shows  these  excesses  of 
the  Julian  year  for  the  given  number  of  cycles : 


Cycles. 

1 

76 

Table  of  Corrections. 

D.  H.  M.  s. 

Julian  years  minus  5 55  16  = 

940  months. 

2 

152 

It 

It 

11 

50 

32  = 

1,880 

tt 

3 

228 

It 

tt 

17 

45 

48 

2,820 

tt 

4 

304 

It 

It 

23 

41 

4 

3,760 

tt 

5 

380 

it 

It 

1 

5 

36 

20  = 

4,700 

tt 

6 

456 

ti 

It 

1 

11 

31 

36  = 

5,640 

a 

8 

608 

tt 

It 

1 

23 

22 

8 = 

7,520 

it 

12 

912 

It 

tt 

2 

23 

3 

12  = 

11,280 

it 

24 

1824 

It 

It 

5 

22 

6 

24  = 

22,560 

tt 

48 

3648 

tt 

tt 

11 

20 

12 

48  = 

45,120 

tt 

The  epoch  of  the  first  cycle  is  estimated  to  be  b.c.  2924,  with 
a correction  of  six  hours,  the  new  moon  being  taken  to  be  six 


APPENDIX. 


283 


hours  before  the  1st  of  January  in  that  year.  This  will  be  an 
additional  general  correction  of  six  hours,  which  must  always 
be  added  to  the  other  corrections. 

TABLE  OF  MONTHS. 

The  table  is  for  the  common  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty- 
five  days.  For  leap-years  the  amounts  in  the  table  must  be  in- 
creased one  day  for  all  months  after  February  29.  They  all 
have  minus  signs  except  March,  which  has  a plus  sign.  These 
denote  that  the  amounts  with  which  they  are  connected  are  to  be 
subtracted,  if  minus , or  added,  if  plus , to  the  time  of  new  moon 
in  January  to  give  the  new  moons  of  the  months  to  which  they 
belong.  In  the  case  of  March,  which  has  a plus  sign,  this  in 
leap-years  becomes  minus  twenty -two  hours,  thirty-one  minutes, 
and  fifty-four  seconds,  which  is  the  exjiression  for  -f  one  hour, 
twenty-eight  minutes,  and  six  seconds  — twenty-four  hours. 

Full  moon  is  obtained  by  subtracting  fourteen  days,  eighteen 
hours,  twenty-two  minutes,  and  one  second  from  the  time  of 
now  moon.  When  the  time  of  new  moon  is  less  than  the  time 
to  be  taken  from  it,  it  must  be  increased  one  lunation. 


Table  of  Months. 


February, 

Days. 

1 

Hours. 

11 

Minutes. 

15 

Seconds. 

57 

March, 

+ 

0 

1 

28 

6 

April, 

— 

1 

9 

47 

51 

May, 

— 

1 

21 

3 

48 

June, 

— 

3 

8 

19 

45 

July, 

— 

3 

19 

35 

42 

August, 

— 

5 

6 

51 

39 

September, 

— 

6 

18 

7 

36 

October, 

— 

7 

5 

23 

33 

November, 

— 

8 

16 

39 

30 

December, 

— 

9 

3 

55 

27 

LEAP-YEARS. 

Every  year  b.c.  which  is  divisible  by  four  with  one  for  a re- 
mainder, is  a leap-year,  and  every  year  a.d.  which  when  divided 
by  four  leaves  no  remainder,  is  of  the  same  character. 


284 


APPENDIX. 


GREGORIAN  YEARS. 

To  obtain  from  the  Julian  Gregorian  dates: 

Between  a.d.  1582,  October  4,  and  a.d.  1700,  March  1,  add  10  days. 

“ “ 1700,  March  1,  “ “ 1800,  “ “ 11  “ 

“ “ 1800,  “ “ “ 1900,  “ “ 12  “ 

ENGLISH  YEARS. 

Up  to  the  reformation  of  the  English  year  it  began  on  the 
25th  of  March.  By  an  enactment  of  the  British  Parliament 
the  year  1751,  which  should  have  come  to  an  end  with  March  24, 
was  made  to  cease  with  December  31,  this  year  being  deprived 
of  eighty-three  days.  This  circumstance  gave  rise  to  a double 
denomination  of  the  time  from  the  1st  of  January  to  March  24, 
inclusive : the  dates  for  this  period  are  sometimes  written  with 
the  year  in  the  form,  At  this  time  eleven  days  were 

struck  out  of  the  Julian  year. 

For  the  English  year: 

Between  a.d.  1752,  September  2,  and  a.d.  1800,  March  1,  add  11  days. 

From  a.d.  1800,  March  1,  the  year  is  the  same  as  the 
Gregorian. 

DIFFERENCES  OF  TIME. 

The  epoch  b.c.  2924  is  adapted  to  the  local  time  of  Philadel- 
phia, U.S.A.  To  find  differences  of  times  for  other  places,  the 
following  table  may  be  employed  for  the  localities  mentioned : 


Hours.  HinuteB.  Seconds. 

Greenwich 5 0 43 

Eome 5 50  43 

Athens 6 35  43 

Alexandria,  Egypt  . . 6 56  43 

Thebes,  “ . . 7 12  43 

Jerusalem 7 21  43 

Babylon 7 58  3 


These  must  be  added  to  time  at  Philadelphia  to  obtain  cor- 
responding local  time  for  the  given  place. 


APPENDIX. 


285 


APPLICATION. 

To  show  the  use  of  this  cycle,  five  new  moons  connected  with 
eclipses  are  calculated. 

1.  b.c.  903,  July  3,  solar  eclipse,  which  has  been  identified 
with  that  found  on  the  Assyrian  monument  of  Assurnazirpal. 

2.  b.c.  885,  July  13,  eclipse  of  the  sun.  This  eclipse  is  sepa- 
rated from  the  former  by  a saros.  It  has  been  identified  with 
that  of  Shamas  Phul. 

3.  b.c.  603,  May  18,  eclipse  of  the  sun. 

4.  b.c.  585,  May  28,  eclipse  of  the  sun.  This  eclipse  is  identi- 
fied by  Mr.  Airy,  the  astronomer  royal,  and  others  to  be  the  one 
predicted  by  Thales. 

5.  a.d.  1836,  May  15,  solar  eclipse.  Mean  time  of  new  moon, 
common  reckoning,  May  15,  nine  hours,  four  minutes,  and  twenty- 
seven  seconds.  The  eclipse  commenced  seven  hours  and  six 
minutes,  morning,  and  ended  nine  hours  and  thirty-seven  min- 
utes, morning,  lasting  two  hours  and  thirty-one  minutes.  The 
time  is  for  Philadelphia. 

1.  Find  for  the  given  year  the  year  of  the  cycle  corre- 
sponding to  it,  and  the  amount  of  corrections  which  ai’e  to 
be  deducted  from  the  age  of  the  month  of  January  for  that 
year. 

If  the  time  is  b.c.,  take  one  year  from  the  number  of  the  year 
for  which  the  calculation  is  to  be  made,  and  subtract  the  re- 
mainder from  the  epoch  b.c.  2924.  If  the  time  is  a.d.,  add  the 
number  of  the  year  taken  to  the  year  of  the  epoch.  Next  ob- 
tain from  the  table  of  corrections  the  largest  number  of  Julian 
years  there  found  which  can  be  taken  from  the  result  of  the 
first  process,  and  set  opposite  it  the  correction  in  the  table 
designated.  Subtract  the  years,  and  if  the  result  is  still  greater 
than  seventy-six,  take  from  it  the  largest  possible  number  of 
Julian  years  in  the  table  with  its  correction.  Continue  this  pro- 
cess until  the  remainder  is  less  than  seventy-six  years,  when  it 
will  denote  the  year  of  the  cycle.  Next  add  up  all  the  correc- 
tions, including  the  general  correction  of  six  hours,  and  subtract 
the  sum  from  the  amount  found  in  the  table  of  seventy-six  years 
opposite  the  year  of  the  cycle  already  obtained.  The  result  will 
give  the  time  of  new  moon  for  January  of  the  required  year. 


286 


APPENDIX. 


For  new  moon  of  the  other  months  of  this  year  subtract  or 
add,  as  designated  by  the  table  of  months,  the  amount  set  oppo- 
site the  required  month.  Notice  whether  the  year  is  a leap- 
year  or  not,  and  follow  the  rules  given  in  these  cases.  If  the 
amount  to  be  subtracted  is  greater  than  the  minuend,  increase 
the  latter  by  twenty-nine  days,  twelve  hours,  forty-four  minutes, 
and  three  seconds,  and  then  make  the  reduction.  The  times  in 
the  table  of  seventy-six  years  are  all  reckoned  from  midnight. 
As  the  age  of  the  month  is  given,  to  find  the  common  date 
the  days  must  be  increased  one,  and  the  hours,  if  more  than 
twelve,  must  have  twelve  taken  from  them.  For  example,  if 
the  final  result  is  January  five  days,  twenty  hours,  and  ten 
minutes,  this  means  the  6tli  of  January,  eight  hours  and  ten 
minutes  p.m. 


1.  New  moon  of  the  eclipse  of  b.c.  903,  July  3 : 


Epoch  b.c 

Year  of  cycle 

Deduct  corrections  .... 

Add  difference  of  time, 
about  8 hours 


D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

2924 

— 0 

6 

0 

0 

902 

2022 

1824 

— 5 

22 

6 

21 

198 

152 

— 0 

11 

50 

32 

46 

6 

15 

56 

53 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

46 

= 12 

12 

54 

29 

6 

15 

56 

53 

5 

20 

57 

36 

0 

8 

0 

0 

6 

4 

57 

36 

Subtract  time  for  July 

new  moon 3 19  35  42 

2 9 21  54 

(+  1) 

3 9 21  64 


January  new 
moon  for  Cen- 
tral Asia. 


The  result  is:  new  moon  on  July  3,  nine  hours,  twenty-one 
minutes,  and  fifty-four  seconds,  b.c.  903,  in  the  morning. 


APPENDIX, 


287 


2.  New  moon  of  the  eclipse  of  b.c.  885,  July  13 : 


Epoch  b.c, 


Year  of  cycle  . 


Corrections 


D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

2924 

— 0 

6 

0 

0 

884 

2040 

1824 

— 5 

22 

6 

21 

216 

152 

— 0 

11 

50 

32 

64 

6 

15 

56 

53 

D 

H. 

M. 

S. 

64 

= 23 

20 

37 

6 

6 

15 

56 

53 

17 

4 

40 

13 

January  new 

moon,  Phila- 
phia. 

D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

17 

4 

40 

13 

0 

8 

0 

0 

17 

12 

40 

13 

New  moon  for 

Central  Asia. 

4 

19 

35 

42 

12 

17 

4 

31 

New  moon,  July. 

(+  DC 

-12) 

13 

5 

4 

31 

New  moon  July  13,  five  hours,  four  minutes,  and  thirty-one 
seconds  in  the  afternoon. 


3.  Eclipse  of  the  sun  b.c.  603,  May  18 : 


D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

Epoch  b.c 

. . . 2924 

0 

6 

0 

0 

602 

2322 

1824  — 

5 

22 

6 

24 

498 

456  — 

i 

11 

31 

36 

Year  of  cycle  . . . , 

7 

15 

38 

0 

288 


APPENDIX, 


D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

42  = 26 

12 

56 

10 

Corrections  . . . 

....  7 

15 

38 

0 

18 

21 

18 

10 

Difference  of  time 

....  0 

8 

0 

0 

19 

5 

18 

10 

Time  for  May  . . 

....  1 

21 

3 

48- 

17 

8 

14 

22 

(+  1) 

18 

8 

14 

22 

New  moon  on 

the  18th  of  May,  eight 

hours,  fc 

and  twenty-two  seconds  in  the  morning, 

4.  Eclipse  of  : 

b.c.  585,  May  28  : 

D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

Epoch  b.c.  . . . 

. . . . 2924  — 0 

6 

0 

0 

584 

2340 

1824  — 5 

22 

6 

24 

516 

456  — 1 

11 

31 

36 

Year  of  cycle  . . 

....  60  7 

15 

38 

0 

D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

60=  8 

7 

54 

44 

Corrections  . . . 

....  7 

15 

38 

0 

0 

16 

16 

44 

Difference  of  time 

....  0 

8 

0 

0 

1 

0 

16 

44 

29 

12 

44 

3 

30 

13 

0 

47 

2 

21 

3 

48 

27 

15 

56 

59 

(+  1)( 

-12) 

28 

3 

56 

59 

tral  Asia,  for 
January. 


May. 


New  moon,  Jan- 
uary, Central 
Asia. 


APPENDIX. 


289 


New  moon  on  the  28th  of  May,  three  hours,  fifty-six  minutes, 
and  fifty-nine  seconds  in  the  afternoon,  b.c.  585. 

The  eclipse  of  b.c.  G03  and  that  of  b.c.  585  are  separated  by  a 
sai'os.  The  saros  is  the  time  for  the  return  of  the  same  eclipse, 
which  will  fall  as  to  its  date  ten  days,  seven  hours,  and  forty- 
two  minutes  later  in  the  month  than  the  previous  one  if  there 
are  five  intercalary  days  in  the  Julian  year  during  the  period, 
and  eleven  days  plus  if  there  are  only  four  intercalary  days. 


Days.  Hours.  Minutes. 

Eclipse  of  b.c.  585  was  27  15  56  -f- 

“ “ 603  “ 17  8 14  + 

10  7 42  + 

The  same  difference  will  be  found  to  exist  between  the 
eclipses  of  b.c.  903  and  b.c.  885. 

I have  not  at -hand  the  calculation  of  the  eclipse  of  b.c.  585 
made  by  Mr.  Airy,  but  it  is  gathered  from  his  criticism  upon 
Oltmanns’s  calculation  for  the  eclipse  of  Thales  that  whatever 
difference  there  is,  it  is  limited  by  the  circumstance  that  Mr.  Airy 
places  the  eclipse  of  b.c.  603  in  the  morning  and  that  of  b.c.  585 
in  the  afternoon,  which  is  the  same  result  reached  by  the  calcu- 
lation just  made.  The  following  is  from  the  “Monthly  Notices 
of  the  Eoyal  Astronomical  Society,”  vol.  xviii.,  February  12, 
1858 : “ I think  it  not  at  all  impossible  that  the  eclipse  was  so 
predicted ; and  there  is  one  easy  way,  and  only  one,  of  pre- 
dicting it, — namely,  by  the  saros,  or  period  of  eighteen  years, 
ten  days,  and  eight  hours,  nearly.  By  the  use  of  this  period  an 
evening  eclipse  may  be  predicted  from  a morning  eclipse  ; but  a 
morning  eclipse  can  be  rarely  predicted  from  an  evening  eclipse 
(as  the  interval  of  eight  hours  after  an  evening  eclipse  will 
generally  throw  the  eclipse  at  the  end  of  the  saros  into  the 
hours  of  the  night).  The  evening  eclipse,  therefore,  of  b.c.  584, 
May  28,  which  I adopted  as  being  most  certainly  the  eclipse  of 
Thales,  might  be  predicted  from  the  morning  eclipse  of  b.c.  602, 
May  17 ; and  a man  of  astronomical  and  geometrical  knowledge 
might,  from  the  circumstances  of  one,  form  a shrewd  guess  on 
the  circumstances  of  the  other,  provided  the  hours  of  day  were 
such  as  to  make  both  eclipses  visible.  Now,  the  hours  were 

25 


290 


APPENDIX. 


such  as  to  make  both  eclipses  visible ; and,  moreover,  the  eclipse 
of  b.c.  602  was  a large  eclipse  in  Asia  Minor  and  the  Levant.  It 
is,  therefore,  very  probable  that  the  eclipse  of  b.c.  584  was  pre- 
dicted as  it  is  asserted.  No  other  of  the  eclipses  discussed  by 
Baily  or  Oltmanns  presents  the  same  facility  for  prediction.” 
The  years  and  dates  of  the  quotation  from  Mr.  Airy  are  those 
used  by  astronomers,  b.c.  1,  according  to  chronologers,  is  reck- 
oned as  B.c.  0 by  astronomers,  and  the  latter  mean  by  b.c.  602 
and  b.c.  584  the  years  in  common  understanding,  b.c.  603  and 
b.c.  585.  The  astronomers  also  reckon  the  days  from  noon,  and 
the  time  seventeenth  day  in  the  morning  means  the  eighteenth 
day,  that  by  the  civil  reckoning  beginning  at  midnight.  The 
circumstances  cited  by  Mr.  Airy  are  applicable  to  the  eclipses 
of  b.c.  903  and  b.c.  885 ; they  have  the  same  relation  to  each 
other,  that  of  b.c.  903  being  in  the  morning  and  that  of  b.c. 
885  in  the  afternoon.  The  results  obtained  by  the  crude 
method  I have  explained  are  quite  satisfactory.  I conclude 
with  a calculation  of  a new  moon  of  comparatively  recent 
date,  and  the  result  happens  in  this  case  to  be  very  near  the 
truth. 

5.  a.d.  1836,  May  15,  eclipse  of  the  sun  at  Philadelphia. 
Mean  time  of  new  moon,  common  reckoning,  was  May  15,  nine 
hours,  four  minutes,  and  twenty-seven  seconds.  The  eclipse 
commenced  in  the  morning  seven  hours  and  six  minutes  and 
ended  nine  hours  and  thirty-seven  minutes,  lasting  two  hours 
and  thirty-one  minutes. 


D. 

H. 

M. 

S. 

2924  — 

0 

6 

0 

0 

1836 

4760 
3648  — 

11 

20 

12 

48 

1112 

912  -- 

2 

23 

3 

12 

200 

152  — 

0 

11 

50 

32 

48 

15 

13 

6 

32 

T ear  of  cycle 


APPENDIX. 


291 


D. 

H. 

M. 

s. 

00 

II 

to 

o 

19 

15 

42 

Corrections 

....  15 

13 

6 

32 

5 

6 

9 

10 

Add  12  days  for  Gregorian  year 

12 

17 

6 

9 

10 

Time  for  May.  Leap-year  . . 

2 

21 

3 

48 

li 

9 

5 

22 

(+1) 

15 

9 

5 

22 

New  moon,  Janu- 
ary, Philadel- 
phia, Julian 
year. 

New  moon,  Janu- 
ary, Gregorian 
year. 

New  moon,  May. 


H.  M.  S. 
New  moon,  May  15,  9 5 22 

Correct  time  for  mean  new  moon,  May  15,  9 4 27 

Difference,  55 


From  the  foregoing  calculations  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
method  employed  is  sufficiently  correct  for  many  purposes. 


II.  TABLES  FOR  DETERMINING  CORRESPONDING  DATES  BETWEEN 
THE  JULIAN  AND  THE  EGYPTIAN  VAGUE  YEAR. 


The  adjustment  between  the  two  is  made  upon  a statement 
of  an  ancient  astronomer,  Timocharis.  He  has  left  on  record 
an  observation  of  the  place  of  Venus  on  the  17th  of  Mechir,  in 
the  thirteenth  year  of  Philadelphus,  which  year,  by  the  canon, 
began  in  b.c.  $73  ; but  the  month  Mechir  fell  in  b.c.  $72.  By  a 
modern  calculation  this  has  been  found  to  correspond  to  October 
8,  b.c.  ^72. 

Table  I.  gives  the  Egyptian  dates  corresponding  to  the  1st  of 
March  for  the  bissextile  years.  The  horizontal  column  at  the 
top  contains  the  hundreds  for  each  bissextile,  and  the  two  per- 
pendicular colums  headed  b.c.  and  a.d.  contain  the  remaining 
numbers  of  these  years.  The  other  columns  have  the  Egyptian 
dates  concurring  with  March  1.  Tables  II.  and  III.  are  re- 
spectively tables  of  days  of  the  Egyptian  vague  year  and  the 
common  Julian  year  of  three  hundred  and  sixty-five  days. 


*7 


DATES  OF  MARCH 


292 


APPENDIX 


P s 

H 

H 

5 

Ph 

r* 

O 

H 

. . H 

H a 
* H 

S a 

s : 


Ht)  CO  N 03  (7l  O 

Cl  Cl  N <N  (N  CO 

Faym. 


H N CO  Tic 

Epiphi. 


to  CO  I>  00  05  o 


N CO  tO  CO  £*»  00  05  O 


Payni. 


to  CO  I>  00  05  o 

Pachons. 


H W CO 

Pharmuthi. 


tO  CO  l'-  CO  05  o 


Pachons. 


tO  CO  t-—  00  05  o 

r-i  rH  r-l  rH  i-H  <N 

Phamenoth. 


H M CO 

Cl  (M  Cl  (M 


HCICOtCiOOI'OOO) 

Pharmuthi. 


COCICOO-fCOC'JCOO 


to  co  oo  05  o 

Cj  Cl  Cl  Cl  <N  CO 

Epiphi. 


I-I  <N  CO  Tje 

Mesori. 


to  co  r—  co  os  o 


OCOtJIiOCODCOO' 


O H Ol  CO  T in 

Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl  d Cl 

Meson. 


Or-(0JC0-^Or-l<MC0^l0C0I>0005 

Intercalary.  Thoth. 


O H Cl  CO  Tl<  LO 

ThothT  ^ ^ ^ 


CO  l'-  CO  05  O 


to  O 00  05  o 

Phaophi. 


Phaoplii. 


H d CO  ^ lO 

Athyr. 


CO  l>  00  05  o 


Cl  CO  iQ  co 


Athyr. 


H Cl  CO  ^ 

Khoiakh. 


tO  CO  I>  00  05  o 


Cl  CO  Tji  o o 


O T— I CM  CO  Tje  m 

Cl  d Cl  Cl  Cl  Cl 

Khoiakh. 


HdCOrlliOCONCOOO 

Tybi. 


to  CO  00  05  © 


(NCOdiiOCODCOO! 


Tybi. 


Mechir. 


O rH  (M  CO 

Mechir. 


to  CO  I>  00  05 


Phamenoth. 


to  CO  N CO  O!  O 

Phamenoth. 


Cl  CO  T#  to  to 


I— I (M  (M  (M  <M  <M 


N Cl  Cl  Cl 


h ci  co  m o 

Pharmuthi. 


CO  t'-  CO  05  O 


tO  CO  I'*  CO  05  o 
Cl  d d Cl  Cl  CO 

Pharmuthi. 


H d CO 

Pachons. 


tocopcoaoHdconiioco 


O — I <M  CO  iO 

Cl  Cl  Cl  d Cl  d 

Pachons. 


Oi-eCMCO'^iOCOt^OOGSO 

co  r-i 

Payni. 


to  O OO  05  o 

r-i  H #i— 1 r-i  r-H  (M 

Payni. 


lOCOl-'-C©O5©rHC'4C0''3<lOCOl>a0O5 
d d d d Cl  CO 

Epiphi. 


O H Cl  CO  *11  to 

Epiphi. 


to  D 00  05 


Mesori. 


lO  to  D 00  O)  O 

. tH 

Mesori. 


d CO  TC  to  to 


tO  to  D CO  05 


H d CO  *1-  o 

Intercalary. 


rl  Cl  CO 

Thoth. 


Ol  CO  *H  tO  CO 


•o  co  i'*  co  05  © 

•'  d d d Cl  CO 


dw*3ii0t0>  00  05  0 

Phaophi. 


tO  tO  D CO  05  O 


Phaophi. 


Cl  d d d 


tOtODCOOSOHdCOTltiOtO^COOS 
Cl  d d d d CO 

Athyr. 


to  to  D a)  o 


Athvr. 


©— tCICOTftOT0  1'-00  05  ©^H(MCOT3e 
Cl  Cl  d Cl  d d Cl  d d Cl  CO 

Khoiakh. 


to  co  CO  05  O 

Khoiakh. 


C!  CO  1<  iO  tO 


d d Cl  d Cl 


d d d d 


©tH<NC0Tjet0C0l>00  05O 


Tybi. 


Tybi. 


H d CO  Tje 

Mechir. 


iOc£>I>G0050t— ItNCO-^iOcOr^COOS 


O H d CO  T)t  to 

d ci  d d ci  d 

Mechir. 


H d CO  O tO  t>  CO  05  O 

Phamenoth. 


APPENDIX, 


293 


Table  II. 

TABLE  OF  DAYS  OF  EGYPTIAN  YEAE. 


Dates. 

w 

Eh 

O 

w 

H 

Phaophi. 

Athyb. 

Khoiakh, 

Tybi. 

Mechir. 

Phamenoth. 

Phakmcthi. 

1 

Pachons. 

H 

Hi 

Ph 

3 

Oh 

£ 

w 

Mesori. 

1.  . . 

i 

31 

61 

91 

121 

151 

181 

211 

241 

271 

301 

331 

2.  . . 

2 

32 

62 

92 

122 

152 

182 

212 

242 

272 

302 

332 

3.  . . 

3 

33 

63 

93 

123 

153 

183 

213 

243 

273 

303 

333 

4.  . . 

4 

34 

64 

94 

124 

154 

184 

214 

244 

274 

304 

334 

5 . . . 

5 

35 

65 

95 

125 

155 

185 

215 

245 

275 

305 

335 

6 . . . 

6 

36 

66 

96 

126 

156 

186 

216 

246 

276 

306 

336 

7.  . . 

7 

37 

67 

97 

127 

157 

187 

217 

247 

277 

307 

337 

8 . . . 

8 

38 

68 

98 

128 

158 

188 

218 

248 

278 

308 

338 

9.  . . 

9 

39 

69 

99 

129 

159 

189 

219 

249 

279 

309 

339 

10  . . . 

10 

40 

70 

100 

130 

160 

190 

220 

250 

280 

310 

340 

11.  . . 

11 

41 

71 

101 

131 

161 

191 

221 

251 

281 

311 

341 

12.  . . 

12 

42 

72 

102 

132 

162 

192 

222 

252 

282 

312 

342 

13  . . . 

13 

43 

73 

103 

133 

163 

193 

223 

253 

283 

313 

343 

14.  . . 

14 

44 

74 

104 

134 

164 

194 

224 

254 

284 

314 

344 

15.  . . 

15 

45 

75 

105 

135 

165 

195 

225 

255 

285 

315 

345 

1<>  . . . 

16 

46 

76 

106 

136 

166 

196 

226 

256 

286 

316 

346 

17  . . . 

17 

47 

77 

107 

137 

167 

197 

227 

257 

287 

317 

347 

18.  . . 

18 

48 

78 

108 

138 

168 

198 

228 

258 

288 

318 

348 

19.  . . 

19 

49 

79 

109 

139 

169 

199 

229 

259 

289 

319 

349 

20.  . . 

20 

50 

80 

110 

140 

170 

200 

230 

260 

290 

320 

350 

21  . . . 

21 

51 

81 

111 

141 

171 

201 

231 

261 

291 

321 

351 

22.  . . 

22 

52 

82 

112 

142 

172 

202 

232 

262 

292 

322 

352 

23.  . . 

23 

53 

83 

113 

143 

173 

203 

233 

263 

293 

323 

353 

24.  . . 

24 

54 

84 

114 

144 

174 

204 

234 

264 

294 

324 

354 

25  . . . 

25 

55 

85 

115 

145 

175 

205 

235 

265 

295 

325 

355 

26  . . . 

26 

56 

86 

116 

146 

176 

206 

236 

266 

296 

326 

356 

27.  . . 

27 

57 

87 

117 

147 

177 

207 

237 

267 

297 

327 

357 

28.  . . 

28 

58 

88 

118 

148 

178 

208 

238 

268 

298 

328 

358 

29  . . . 

29 

59 

89 

119 

149 

179 

209 

239 

269 

299 

329 

359 

30.  . . 

30 

60 

90 

120 

150 

ISO 

210 

240 

270 

300 

330 

360 

11 

361 

2 

362 

3 !-  Intercalary  days 

363 

4 

364 

5 J 

365 

25* 


294 


APPENDIX, 


Table  III. 

TABLE  OF  DATS  OF  THE  COMMON  TEAR,  THREE  HUNDRED  AND 
SIXTT-FITE  DATS. 


Dates. 

January. 

February. 

March. 

April. 

May. 

June. 

.J 

P 

•“5 

H 

M 

P 

o 

D 

< 

September. 

October. 

November.  | 

1 

December. 

1 . . . 

1 

32 

60 

91 

121 

152 

182 

213 

244 

274 

305 

335 

2.  . . 

2 

33 

61 

92 

122 

153 

183 

214 

245 

275 

306 

336  1 

3.  . . 

3 

34 

62 

93 

123 

154 

184 

215 

246 

276 

307 

337 

4.  . . 

4 

35 

63 

94 

121 

155 

185 

216 

247 

277 

308 

338 

5.  . 

5 

36 

04 

95 

125 

156 

186 

217 

248 

278 

309 

339 

6 . . . 

6 

37 

65 

96 

126 

157 

187 

218 

249 

279 

310 

340 

7 . . . 

7 

38 

66 

97 

127 

158 

188 

219 

250 

280 

311 

341 

8 . . . 

8 

39 

67 

98 

128 

159 

189 

220 

251 

281 

312 

342 

9.  . . 

9 

40 

68 

99 

129 

160 

190 

221 

252 

282 

313 

343 

10.  . . 

10 

41 

69 

100 

130 

161 

191 

222 

253 

283 

314 

344 

11  . . . 

11 

42 

70 

101 

131 

162 

192 

223 

254 

284 

315 

345 

12.  . . 

12 

43 

71 

102 

132 

163 

193 

224 

255 

285 

316 

346 

13  . . . 

13 

44 

72 

103 

133 

164 

194 

225 

256 

286 

317 

347 

14.  . . 

.14 

45 

73 

104 

134 

165 

195 

226 

257 

287 

318 

348 

15  . . . 

15 

46 

74 

105 

135 

166 

196 

227 

258 

288 

319 

349 

16.  . . 

16 

47 

75 

106 

136 

167 

197 

228 

259 

289 

320 

350 

17  . . . 

17 

48 

76 

107 

137 

168 

198 

229 

260 

290 

321 

351 

18.  . . 

18 

49 

77 

108 

138 

169 

199 

230 

261 

291 

322 

352 

19  . . . 

19 

50 

78 

109 

139 

170 

200 

231 

262 

292 

323 

353 

20  . . . 

20 

51 

79 

110 

140 

171 

201 

232 

263 

293 

324 

354 

21  . . . 

21 

52 

80 

111 

141 

172 

202 

233 

264 

294 

325 

355 

22.  . . 

22 

53 

81 

112 

142 

173 

203 

234 

265 

295 

326 

356 

23  . . . 

23 

54 

82 

113 

143 

174 

204 

235 

266 

296 

327 

357 

24.  . . 

24 

55 

83 

114 

144 

175 

205 

236 

267 

297 

328 

358 

25.  . . 

25 

56 

84 

115 

145 

176 

206 

237 

268 

298 

329 

359 

26  . . . 

26 

57 

85 

116 

146 

177 

207 

238 

269 

299 

330 

360 

27  . . . 

27 

58 

86 

117 

147 

178 

208 

239 

270 

300 

331 

361 

28.  . . 

28 

59 

87 

118 

148 

179 

209 

240 

271 

301 

332 

362 

29.  . . 

29 

88 

119 

149 

180 

210 

241 

272 

302 

333 

363 

30.  . . 

30 

89 

120 

150 

181 

211 

242 

273 

303 

334 

364 

31.  . . 

3! 

90 

1 ’ ’ 

151 

1 ' ‘ 

212 

243 

304 

365 

APPENDIX. 


295 


RULES  GOVERNING  THE  USE  OP  THE  STABLE. 

1.  Find  the  concurrent  date  of  the  1st  of  March  in  the  given 
year.  For  example,  let  the  given  year  be  b.c.  747.  Eun  down 
the  column  700  of  Table  I.  until  opposite  b.c.  49;  this  denotes 
the  year  749,  which  is  the  bissextile  year  previous  to  b.c.  747. 
The  concurrences  established  in  this  year  (749)  after  March  1 
will  continue  down  to  March  1,  b.c.  745,  the  next  bissextile 
year.  The  finger  stops  in  column  700  opposite  b.c.  49,  where 
is  found  Thoth  7 for  the  concurrent  date  of  March  1 in 
b.c.  747. 

2.  The  concurrences  for  all  the  other  dates  are  calculated 
from  March  1 and  its  corresponding  Egyptian  date,  using  the 
two  tables  of  days.  March  1 is  the  60th  day  of  the  year  in  the 
table  of  days  for  all  dates  following  it  in  the  bissextile  year, 
and  for  all  the  dates  of  the  three  following  years.  March  1 is 
the  61st  day  of  the  year  for  all  dates  before  it  in  the  bissextile 
year. 


APPLICATION. 

The  7th  of  Thoth  has  been  found  to  concur  with  the  1st  of 
March  in  b.c.  749.  To  find  the  concurrent  date  of  the  1st  of 
Thoth  in  this  year,  take  the  difference  betwmen  the  1st  of  Thoth 
and  the  7th  of  Thoth,  which  is  6 days,  and  subtract  it  from 
61,  because  b.c.  749  is  a bissextile  year;  the  result  gives  55, 
which  in  the  table  of  days  denotes  February  24.  To  find  the 
concurrence  for  b.c.  747,  the  same  number  of  days  is  to  be  sub- 
tracted from  60,  because  b.c.  747  is  not  a leap-year ; the  result,  54, 
denotes  February  23  as  the  concurrent  date.  To  find  the  concur- 
rent date  for  the  12th  of  Pachons  in  749,  748,  747,  746,  find  from 
Table  II.  the  number  for  12th  of  Pachons,  which  is  252,  then 
find  how  many  days  this  is  after  the  7th  of  Thoth  by  subtract- 
ing from  it  7 days,  and  add  the  result,  245  days,  to  60  (March  1), 
and  we  obtain  the  305th  day  of  the  Julian  year,  which  in  the 
table  of  days  is  found  to  be  November  1,  the  concurrent  date  for 
12th  of  Pachons.  To  find  the  concurrence  of  November  1 the 
process  is  reversed : 60  is  subtracted  from  305,  and  the  re- 
mainder, 245,  is  added  to  7,  giving  252,  the  12th  of  Pachons. 
In  the  foregoing  the  7th  of  Thoth  is  also  the  seventh  day  of  the 


296 


APPENDIX. 


year ; the  calculations  are  made  from  the  numbers  of  the  dates 
in  the  tables  of  days. 

Table  I.  has  for  the  years  from  b.c.  237  to  b.c.  197,  inclusive, 
the  concurrences  in  brackets.  This  is  done  to  conform  to  the 
hypothesis  advanced,  that  during  this  period  the  Egyptian  year 
was  substantially  like  the  Julian,  and  consequently  there  was  no 
advance  of  the  dates  of  the  latter  in  the  former,  and  that  at  the 
end  of  this  period  the  vague  dates  were  restored  by  increasing 
the  dates  of  the  Egyptian  year  ten  days ; hence  b.c.  196  has  a 
concurrence  with  the  Julian  the  same  as  if  no  change  had  been 
made  in  the  Egyptian  year  between  b.c.  237  and  b.c.  197. 

In  discussing  the  coins  of  the  Ptolemies  this  view  was  quali- 
fied by  the  hypothesis  that  the  decree  of  Canopus  was  only  en- 
forced down  to  b.c.  219,  at  which  time  five  days  had  been  added 
to  the  Egyptian  year,  and  from  this  time  on  down  to  b.c.  197 
the  vague  year  was  in  force,  but  with  the  concurrence  produced 
by  the  addition  of  five  days  in  the  Canopic  year,  and  in  b.c.  197 
the  proper  vague  dates  were  restored  by  subtracting  the  five 
intercalary  days. 

With  this  view  the  concurrent  dates  for  1st  of  March  will  be : 


B.C. 

237, 

March 

1 = Tybi  14  (15). 

u 

233, 

U 

= “ “ (16). 

1 1 

229, 

U 

=3  “ “ (17). 

u 

225, 

LL 

= “ “ (18). 

Li 

221, 

LL 

= “ “ (19). 

l ( 

217, 

LL 

= “ 15  (20). 

l L 

213, 

LL 

= “ 16  (21). 

LI 

209, 

U 

= “ 17  (22). 

205, 

( L 

= “ 18  (23). 

a 

201, 

LL 

= “ 19  (24). 

LL 

197, 

LL 

= “ 20  (25). 

LL 

196, 

U 

= “ 25. 

The  adjustment  between  the  Julian  and  the  vague  year  in 
vogue  causes  the  1st  of  Thoth,  b.c.  747,  to  concur  with  February 
26.  This  is  the  condition  which  comes  about  twelve  years 
earlier  by  the  tables.  If  the  common  or  usual  correspondence 
is  desired,  increase  the  given  year  by  twelve,  and  find  for  the 
year  so  obtained. 


APPENDIX. 


297 


III.  HOW  TO  FIND  THE  DAY  OF  THE  WEEK  FOR  ANY  DATE. 


B.C. 

A.D. 

16 

13 

15 

14 

14 

15 

13 

16 

12 

17 

11 

18 

10 

19 

9 

20 

8 

21 

7 

22 

6 

23 

5 

24 

4 

25 

3 

26 

2 

27 

i 

28 

28 

1 

27 

2 

26 

3 

25 

4 

24 

5 

23 

6 

22 

7 

21 

8 

20 

9 

19 

10 

18 

11 

17 

12 

B. 

B. 

B. 

B. 

B. 

B. 

B. 

January 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

i 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

February 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

G 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

March 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

G 

7 

1 

3 

April 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

May  

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

G 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

June 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

July 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

G 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

G 

August 

3 

4 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

G 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

G 

1 

2 

3 

4 

G 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

September ... 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

i 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

i 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

i 

2 

3 

5 

October 

1 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

G 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

November.... 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

i 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

December.... 

6 

7 

1 

3 

4 

5 

6 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

1 

2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

1 

2 

3 

5 

EXPLANATION  OF  TABLE. 

The  numbers  of  the  years  in  horizontal  columns  b.c.  and  a.d. 
are  those  of  a cycle  of  the  sun.  They  are  to  each  other  in 
reverse  order  because  the  years  b.c.  are  counted  in  reverse  order 
to  those  a.d.  The  numbers  in  the  columns  perpendicular  to  the 
columns  first  mentioned  are  those  of  the  days  of  the  week 
which  begin  the  months  they  are  set  opposite. 

The  days  of  the  week  are  represented  as  follows : 1 = Sunday, 
2 = Monday,  3 = Tuesday,  4 ==  Wednesday,  5 = Thursday,  6 = 
Friday,  7 = Saturday. 

To  find  the  day  of  the  week  for  any  date  b.c.  or  a.d.  : 

1.  Divide  the  number  of  the  year  b.c.  or  a.d.,  if  it  is  more 
than  28,  by  that  number,  and  the  remainder,  if  any,  will  give 
the  year  of  the  cycle.  If  there  is  no  remainder  the  last  year  of 
the  cycle  is  the  year  required.  The  year  of  the  cycle  obtained, 
if  B.c.,  will  be  found  in  the  upper  of  the  two  horizontal  columns  ; 
if  A.D.,  in  the  lower  of  the  two. 

2.  Having  found  the  year  of  the  cycle,  then  find  the  day 
which  begins  the  given  month.  Its  number  will  be  found  in  the 
column  under  the  year  of  the  cycle  already  obtained  and  opposite 
the  required  month  in  the  table. 

3.  If  a date  other  than  the  first  of  the  month  is  to  be  found, 
take  one  from  the  number  of  the  day  beginning  the  month,  as 
previously  found,  and  add  to  the  remainder  the  number  of  the 


298 


APPENDIX. 


given  date,  and  divide  the  result,  when  possible,  by  7 ; the 
remainder  will  be  the  number  of  the  day  of  the  week  for  the 
date.  If  there  is  no  remainder,  7 is  the  number. 

For  Gregorian  dates: 

Between  October  4,  a.d.  1582,  and  a.d.  1700,  March  1,  subtract  3 days. 

“ March  1,  “ 1700,  “ “ 1800,  “ “ 4 “ 

“ “ “ 1800,  “ “ 1900,  “ “ 5 “ 

For  English  year,  between  September  2,  a.d.  1752,  and  a.d. 
1800,  March  1,  subtract  4 days.  From  b.c.  1800  the  English 
year  is  the  same  as  the  Gregorian. 

APPLICATION. 

Required  the  day  of  the  week  for  February  26,  b.c.  747 : 
747  28  = 26,  quotient,  and  19  remainder.  Year  b.c.  747  is  the 

19th  year  of  the  solar  cycle.  Under  year  19  of  the  column  b.c., 
and  opposite  the  month  of  February,  is  found  7,  consequently 
February  begins  with  Saturday  in  b.c.  747.  7 — 1 = 6 -j-  26  = 
32  7 = quotient  4,  with  4 for  remainder.  This  remainder 

denotes  the  fourth  day  of  the  week,  which  is  Wednesday.  In 
b.c.  747  the  26th  of  February  was  on  Wednesday. 

Required  the  day  of  the  week  for  February  23,  b.c.  728:  728 
-i-  28  = 26,  no  remainder;  therefore  year  28  of  the  cycle  cor- 
responds to  b.c.  728.  Under  28,  upper  column  (b.c.)  and  oppo- 
site February,  is  3.  Tuesday  begins  February  in  b.c.  728.  3 — 

1 — 2 -j-  23  = 25  -p  7 = 3,  quotient,  and  4 remainder.  Feb- 
ruary 23,  b.c.  728,  was  on  Wednesday. 

Required  the  day  of  the  week  for  the  25th  of  December,  a.d. 
1890:  1890  -p  28  = 67,  quotient,  14  remainder.  Under  14,  col- 
umn a.d.,  and  opposite  December,  is  found  7.  From  this  sub- 
tract 5 days  for  the  Gregorian  year,  and  we  get  2,  Monday. 
December  begins  on  Monday.  2 — 1 — 1 -j-  25  = 26  -p  7 = 3, 
quotient,  5 remainder,  which  denotes  Thursday.  December  25, 
a.d.  1890,  is  on  Thursday. 

Note. — When  the  number  to  be  subtracted  is  greater  than 
that  from  which  it  is  to  be  taken,  increase  the  latter  seven  days, 
or  one  week,  and  then  proceed.  In  the  previous  example,  if  the 
Gregorian  correction  of  5 days  had  not  been  subtracted  from 


APPENDIX. 


299 


the  7,  but  left  for  the  last  operation,  the  final  result  Avould  be 
the  same,  and  the  foregoing  note  will  apply. 

7 — 1 = 6-)- 25  =31 -=-7  = 4,  quotient,  3 remainder,  3 — f-  7 = 
10  — 5 = 5,  Thursday. 


IV.  ADVANCE  OF  TIIE  SIDEREAL  YEAR  IN  THE  VAGUE  YEAR. 


Years. 

Days. 

Hours. 

Minutes. 

Seconds. 

1 

6 

9 

9 

2 

12 

18 

19 

3 

18 

27 

28 

4 

i 

0 

36 

37 

5 

l 

6 

45 

47 

6 

l 

12 

64 

56 

7 

l 

19 

4 

5 

8 

2 

1 

13 

15 

9 

2 

7 

22 

24 

10 

2 

13 

31 

33 

20 

5 

3 

3 

7 

30 

7 

16 

34 

40 

40 

10 

6 

6 

14 

80 

20 

12 

12 

28 

120 

30 

18 

18 

42 

160 

41 

0 

24 

56 

320  

82 

0 

49 

52 

480  

123 

1 

14 

47 

510 

130 

17 

49 

28 

540  

138 

10 

24 

8 

1460  

374 

6 

47 

29 

365 

9 

6 

47 

29 

300 


APPENDIX, 


V.  ADVANCE  OF  THE  TROPICAL  IN  THE  VAGUE  YEAR  FOR  FOUR 
HUNDRED  AND  FIFTY  YEARS. 


CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

Q 

PS 

ca 

ps 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PS 

PS 

P 

z 

< 

P 

P 

< 

P 

P 

< 

P 

Z 

w 

< 

o 

w 

< 

O 

« 

◄ 

W 

< 

o 

w 

o 

w 

< 

w 

m 

a 

P 

a 

>* 

P 

B 

1* 

p 

a 

P 

a 

P 

a 

a 

i 

5 

63 

15 

6 

125 

30 

6 

187 

45 

7 

249 

60 

7 

311 

75 

7 

48 

48 

2 

11 

64 

15 

12 

126 

30 

12 

188 

45 

12 

250 

60 

13 

312 

75 

13 

37 

36 

3 

17 

65 

15 

17 

127 

30 

18 

189 

45 

18 

251 

60 

19 

313 

75 

19 

26 

24 

4 

23 

66 

15 

23 

128 

31 

0 

190 

46 

0 

252 

61 

0 

314 

76 

1 

15 

12 

5 

1 

5 

67 

16 

5 

129 

31 

5 

191 

46 

6 

253 

61 

6 

315 

76 

7 

4 

0 

6 

1 

10 

68 

16 

11 

130 

31 

11 

192 

46 

12 

254 

61 

12 

316 

76 

13 

52 

48 

7 

1 

16 

69 

16 

17 

131 

31 

17 

193 

46 

17 

255 

61 

18 

317 

76 

18 

41 

36 

8 

1 

22 

70 

16 

22 

132 

31 

23 

194 

46 

23 

256 

62 

0 

318 

77 

0 

30 

24 

9 

2 

4 

71 

17 

4 

133 

32 

5 

195 

47 

5 

257 

62 

6 

319 

77 

6 

19 

12 

10 

2 

10 

72 

17 

10 

134 

32 

10 

196 

47 

11 

258 

62 

11 

320 

77 

12 

8 

0 

11 

2 

15 

73 

17 

16 

135 

32 

16 

197 

47 

17 

259 

62 

17 

321 

77 

18 

56 

48 

12 

2 

21 

74 

17 

22 

136 

32 

22 

198 

47 

23 

260 

62 

23 

322 

78 

23 

45 

36 

13 

3 

3 

75 

18 

4 

137 

33 

4 

199 

48 

4 

261 

63 

5 

323 

78 

5 

34 

24 

14 

3 

9 

76 

18 

9 

138 

33 

10 

200 

48 

10 

262 

63 

11 

324 

78 

11 

23 

12 

15 

3 

15 

77 

18 

15 

139 

33 

16 

201 

48 

16 

263 

63 

16 

325 

78 

17 

12 

0 

16 

3 

21 

78 

18 

21 

140 

33 

21 

202 

48 

22 

264 

63 

22 

320 

78 

23 

0 

48 

17 

4 

2 

79 

19 

3 

141 

34 

3 

203 

49 

4 

265 

64 

4 

327 

79 

4 

49 

36 

18 

4 

8 

80 

19 

9 

142 

34 

9 

204 

49 

9 

266 

64 

10 

328 

79 

10 

38 

24 

19 

4 

14 

81 

19 

14 

143 

34 

15 

205 

49 

15 

267 

64 

16 

329 

79 

16 

27 

12 

20 

4 

20 

82 

19 

20 

144 

34 

21 

206 

49 

21 

268 

64 

21 

330 

79 

22 

16 

0 

21 

5 

2 

83 

20 

2 

145 

35 

2 

207 

50 

3 

269 

65 

3 

331 

80 

4 

4 

48 

22 

5 

7 

84 

20 

8 

146 

35 

8 

208 

50 

8 

270 

65 

9 

332 

80 

10 

53 

36 

23 

5 

13 

85 

20 

14 

147 

35 

14 

209 

50 

14 

271 

65 

15 

333 

80 

15 

42 

24 

24 

5 

19 

86 

20 

19 

148 

35 

20 

210 

50 

20 

272 

65 

21 

334 

80 

21 

31 

12 

25 

6 

1 

87 

21 

1 

149 

36 

2 

211 

51 

2 

273 

66 

3 

335 

81 

3 

20 

0 

26 

6 

7 

88 

21 

7 

150 

36 

8 

212 

51 

8 

274 

66 

8 

336 

81 

9 

8 

48 

27 

6 

12 

89 

21 

13 

151 

36 

13 

213 

51 

14 

275 

60 

14 

337 

81 

15 

57 

36 

28 

6 

18 

90 

21 

19 

152 

36 

19 

214 

51 

20 

276 

66 

20 

338 

81 

20 

46 

24 

29 

7 

0 

91 

22 

1 

153 

37 

1 

215 

52 

1 

277 

67 

2 

339 

82 

2 

35 

12 

30 

7 

6 

92 

22 

6 

154 

37 

7 

216 

52 

7 

278 

67 

8 

340 

82 

8 

24 

0 

31 

7 

12 

93 

22 

12 

155 

37 

13 

217 

52 

13 

279 

67 

13 

341 

82 

14 

12 

48 

32 

7 

18 

94 

22 

18 

156 

37 

18 

218 

52 

19 

280 

67 

19 

342 

82 

20 

1 

36 

33 

7 

23 

95 

23 

0 

157 

38 

0 

219 

53 

1 

281 

68 

1 

343 

83 

1 

50 

24 

34 

8 

5 

96 

23 

6 

158 

38 

6 

220 

53 

6 

282 

68 

7 

344 

83 

7 

39 

12 

35 

8 

11 

97 

23 

11 

159 

38 

12 

221 

53 

12 

283 

68 

12 

345 

83 

13 

28 

0 

36 

8 

17 

98 

23 

17 

ICO 

38 

18 

222 

53 

18 

284 

68 

18 

346 

83 

19 

16 

48 

37 

8 

23 

99 

23 

23 

161 

38 

23 

223 

54 

0 

285 

69 

0 

347 

84 

1 

5 

36 

38 

9 

4 

100 

24 

5 

162 

39 

5 

224 

54 

6 

286 

69 

6 

348 

84 

7 

54 

24 

39 

9 

10 

101 

24 

11 

163 

39 

11 

225 

54 

12 

287 

69 

12 

349 

81 

12 

43 

12 

40 

9 

16 

102 

24 

16 

164 

39 

17 

226 

54 

17 

288 

69 

18 

350 

81 

18 

32 

0 

41 

9 

22 

103 

24 

22 

165 

39 

23 

227 

54 

23 

289 

70 

0 

351 

85 

0 

20 

48 

42 

10 

4 

104 

25 

4 

166 

40 

5 

228 

55 

5 

290 

70 

5 

352 

85 

6 

9 

36 

43 

10 

9 

105 

25 

10 

167 

40 

10 

229 

55 

11 

291 

70 

11 

353 

85 

12 

58 

24 

44 

10 

15 

106 

25 

16 

168 

40 

16 

230 

55 

17 

292 

70 

17 

354 

85 

17 

47 

12 

45 

10 

21 

107 

25 

22 

169 

40 

22 

231 

55 

22 

293 

70 

23 

355 

85 

23 

36 

0 

46 

11 

3 

108 

26 

3 

170 

41 

4 

232 

56 

4 

294 

71 

5 

356 

86 

5 

24 

48 

47 

11 

9 

109 

26 

9 

171 

41 

10 

233 

56 

10 

295 

71 

10 

357 

86 

11 

13 

36 

48 

11 

15 

110 

26 

15 

172 

41 

15 

234 

56 

16 

296 

71 

16 

358 

86 

16 

2 

24 

49 

11 

20 

111 

26 

21 

173 

41 

21 

235 

56 

22 

297 

71 

22 

359 

86 

22 

51 

12 

50 

12 

2 

112 

27 

3 

174 

42 

3 

236 

57 

3 

298 

72 

4 

360 

87 

4 

40 

0 

51 

12 

8 

113 

27 

8 

175 

42 

9 

237 

57 

9 

299 

72 

10 

361 

87 

10 

28 

48 

52 

12 

14 

114 

27 

14 

176 

42 

15 

238 

57 

15 

300 

72 

16 

362 

87 

16 

17 

36 

53 

12 

20 

115 

27 

20 

177 

42 

20 

239 

57 

21 

301 

72 

21 

363 

87 

22 

6 

24 

54 

13 

1 

116 

28 

2 

178 

43 

2 

240 

58 

3 

302 

73 

3 

364 

88 

4 

55 

12 

55 

13 

7 

117 

28 

8 

179 

43 

8 

241 

58 

9 

303 

73 

9 

365 

88 

9 

44 

0 

56 

13 

13 

118 

28 

13 

180 

43 

14 

242 

58 

14 

304 

73 

15 

366 

88 

15 

32 

48 

57 

13 

19 

119 

28 

19 

181 

43 

20 

243 

58 

20 

305 

73 

21 

367 

88 

21 

21 

36 

58 

14 

1 

120 

29 

1 

182 

44 

2 

244 

59 

2 

306 

74 

2 

368 

89 

3 

10 

24 

59 

14 

6 

121 

29 

7 

183 

44 

7 

245 

59 

8 

307 

74 

8 

369 

89 

9 

59 

12 

60 

14 

12 

122 

29 

13 

184 

44 

13 

246 

59 

14 

308 

74 

14 

370 

89 

14 

48 

0 

61 

14 

18 

123 

29 

19 

185 

44 

19 

247 

59 

19 

309 

74 

20 

371 

89 

20 

36 

48 

62 

15 

0 

124 

30 

0 

186 

45 

1 

248 

60 

1 

310 

75 

2 

372 

90 

2 

25 

36 

APPENDIX 


301 


ADVANCE  OF  THE  TROPICAL  IN  THE  VAGUE  YEAR  FOR  FOUR  HUN- 
DRED AND  FIFTY  YEARS  (CONTINUED). 


j 

| 

• 

• 

• 

rr, 

CO  1 

rr, 

CO 

rr, 

£ 

- 

as 

C6 

« 

a 

a 

CO 

e: 

a 

P 

P 

p 

< 

< 

p 

< 

y. 

o 

C 

U 

c 

o 

a 

<! 

Cd 

< 

c 

r* 

P 

a 

r* 

P 

s 

P> 

B 

a 

kH 

p 

** 

P 

B 

£ 

rn 

373 

90 

8 

386 

93 

11 

399 

96 

15 

412 

99 

19 

425 

102 

22 

438 

106 

2 

14 

24 

374 

90 

14 

387 

93 

17 

400 

9G 

21 

413 

100 

0 

426 

103 

4 

439 

106 

8 

3 

12 

375 

90 

20 

388 

93 

23 

401 

97 

3 

414 

100 

6 

427 

103 

10 

440 

106 

13 

52 

0 

376 

91 

1 

389 

94 

5 

402 

97 

8 

415 

100 

12 

428 

103 

16 

441 

106 

19 

40 

48 

377 

91 

7 

390 

94 

11 

403 

97 

14 

416 

100 

18 

429 

103 

21 

442 

107 

1 

29 

36  ! 

378 

91 

13 

391 

94 

17 

404 

97 

20 

417 

101 

0 

430 

104 

3 

443 

107 

7 

18 

24  : 

379 

91 

19 

392 

94 

22 

405 

98 

2 

418 

101 

5 

431 

104 

9 

444 

107 

13 

7 

12 

380 

92 

1 

393 

95 

4 

406 

98 

8 

419 

101 

11 

432 

104 

15 

445 

107 

18 

56 

0 

381 

92 

6 

394 

95 

10 

407 

98 

14 

420 

101 

17 

433 

104 

20 

446 

108 

0 

41 

48 

382 

92 

12 

395 

95 

16 

408 

98 

19 

421 

101 

23 

434 

105 

2 

447 

108 

6 

33 

36 

383 

92 

18 

396 

95 

22 

409 

99 

1 

422 

102 

5 

435 

105 

8 

448 

108 

12 

22 

24 

384 

93 

0 

397 

96 

3 

410 

99 

7 

423 

102 

ii 

436 

105 

14 

449 

108 

18 

11 

12 

385 

93 

6 

398 

96 

9 

411 

99 

13 

424 

102 

1G 

437 

105 

20 

450 

109 

0 

0 

0 

N.B.— The  last  two  columns  contain  minutes  and  seconds.  They  follow  the  days 


Printed  by  J.  B.  Lippincott  Company,  Philadelphia. 


I 


